Please note: These are not photographs taken by me and I do not retain copyright on them. I got this picture from someone else. If you see this and it's your photo and you require credit, please please email me immediately and I will do so. In the meantime, whoever owns rights to these pictures, thank you for posting wherever you did. I believe it makes a huge impact for people to see the difference a foreskin makes in the glans. MANY circ'ed men suffer very uncomfortable dry skin on the heads of their penis and they are not even aware *why*.
22 comments:
Holy crap. I've never seen a side-by-side photo like that. I've also never seen an intact adult before... but the difference is CRAZY.
Yes the difference is crazy... As a circumcised man I can confirm the photos. Without the foreskin the glan becames "keratinized" : the mucosa becames thicker.
As the wife of a circumcised man and having had circumcised lovers before him, I can also attest to the horrible dry skin that occurs and loss of sensitivity. Sex for me is uncomfortable as well.
Gr8 photo's clearly shows the difference
Until the practice of unnecessary cutting is stopped, expectant parents should be shown this picture and a video of the procedure as well. And then, if the parent(s) still want to go through with it, they should be made to hold the child down during the cutting.
I compare the circumcised penis to a whiteboard marker lacking a cap for the tip. After a while, both "dry out." Nearly every circed penis I've seen (in a locker room) was younger than 25 years of age. Hence this drying out wasn't yet blatant. I suspect that aging is not kind to the cut penis.
The lack of prudishness on the internet has made it possible for a lot of us to further our knowledge of the male bits in major ways.
Amazing. SO happy my son and my husband are both intact. Sad for the folks who never got the choice.
That pinkish/purplish color of the uncut penis means that the blood supply is closer to the surface. This means greater sensitivity for the man. The dull color of the cut penis means this man has lost a great deal of sensitivity.
The sexual advantage of being intact goes well beyond a smoother, moister, and more sensitive glans. Circumcision removes or damages the most sensitive parts of the male body: the ridged band, the frenulum, and the frenular delta. Circumcision means that the erect penis is sheathed with skin that is tight instead of loose. This loose skin makes penetration more comfortable for her. Finally, the foreskin interacts wonderfully with his precum and her natural lube.
When I was in college, it was not unusual for hard-as-nails women students to make sweeping dismissive complaints about their relationships with men. I thought that they were primarly motivated by the feminism that was then the fashion. I now suspect that at least some of them had difficulties enjoying intercourse with cut partners.
BTW, in the place and time of my youth, it would have been absolutely unthinkable for married women to talk about the penis and to look at pictures of the male equipment. No woman would dare be an intactivist in those days, for fear of offending her husband, and of drawing attention to the genitalia of her own sons. The internet has brought about a revolutionary change in women's outlook on the body and intimacy. A young unmarried woman can learn a great deal more about cut and uncut in the privacy of her home office, than I was ever able to learn in my youth.
^^^ sounds like those last 2 are just mad because they got their genitals mutilated
Natural sex didn't intend for artificial lubes. The body continues to produce lubrication all the way through sex - preventing drying up before your done, artificial lube runs out. Also the motion circumcised guys do to get pleasure draws a lot of the lubrication out of the vagina which makes it dry up quicker. Plus you get to save money on lube because your body natural produces it.
Note the hostility and immaturity endemic of cut commenters. I know nobody likes being told, or even acknowledging the fact that their most prized and cherished part was wronged, but look at it this way: you'd do much better to direct that anger you feel towards those who perpetuate this practice.
Just putting in my 2 cents...
Grown men that were intact and then as an adult that got circumcised have said in multiple studies that sex felt pretty much the same.
I'm not sold either way and FYI, I'm a girl. I do find that it isn't the penis that matter, but the person with the penis. If you keep it clean and are about pleasuring your partner, you're good to go!
To Anonymous above, a man who was very recently cut (but healed) likely wouldn't have to much of a difference because he has not had decades of it rubbing on his clothes and being exposed to the air 24/7. Get back to him 20 or 30 years after the procedure and I doubt he'd say his sensitivity is anywhere near the same anymore.
This is sad I am cut and can't believe the difference
The cut guys' comments are underatndabel, because the American Journal of Psychiatry has published a study about a new psychological condition called "foreskin envy" that drived many cut men into a fury against uncut guys:they become aggressive.Sometimes they even use the offensive expression of "collectors of foreskins" against us uncut men.
I am so sorry. I wish it were possible to undue what was done to you. I am female with a husband who is cut, & before our son was born he told me he didn't want to circumcise our son. I was very glad because I too felt that it is a foolish thing to do. Men are made that way & it's there for a good reason...to protect the penis (among other things), so why change it?! I am so grateful that my husband didn't feel the need to change him in this way just so that he could "look like dad" or "look like all the other boys in the locker room". I know that our son will appreciate it one day.
After reading this site, I am even more convinced that we absolutely did the right thing, & feel badly for my husband & all circ'ed men who had the opportunity to make that choice for themselves taken away from them. Following the herd is an assinine reason to permanently remove part of your child's anatomy, & it seems that around here at least, that is the prevailing reason for a majority of people making that choice. To me that is just appalling.
I am uncut and very thankfull I am, my penis is very sensitive and if the skin is retracted while wearing underwear it very soon becomes unbearably uncomfortable and dry.
I can understand why some women say they prefer a cut one because it's dry and clean, but intact are clean if washed, and intact guys know its a part that needs keeping clean and it's so easy to do.
It won't be dry when first retracted but it's only moist to enable to do the job it's intended for,
When it's time to penetrate its much more easy to penetrate if I pull the skin back over the tip first.
As for sensitivity I don't think it could get any better, and that includes the bit cut men don't have.
I fail to understand why it's done given the risks of things not turning out as it should, such as badly done operations or even bad infection that in a few cases have ended in death.
The big question I ask is why it's really done and is it worth doing when it works so extremely well without it done.
I am uncut and very thankfull I am, my penis is very sensitive and if the skin is retracted while wearing underwear it very soon becomes unbearably uncomfortable and dry.
I can understand why some women say they prefer a cut one because it's dry and clean, but intact are clean if washed, and intact guys know its a part that needs keeping clean and it's so easy to do.
It won't be dry when first retracted but it's only moist to enable to do the job it's intended for,
When it's time to penetrate its much more easy to penetrate if I pull the skin back over the tip first.
As for sensitivity I don't think it could get any better, and that includes the bit cut men don't have.
I fail to understand why it's done given the risks of things not turning out as it should, such as badly done operations or even bad infection that in a few cases have ended in death.
The big question I ask is why it's really done and is it worth doing when it works so extremely well without it done.
I am uncut and very thankfull I am, my penis is very sensitive and if the skin is retracted while wearing underwear it very soon becomes unbearably uncomfortable and dry.
I can understand why some women say they prefer a cut one because it's dry and clean, but intact are clean if washed, and intact guys know its a part that needs keeping clean and it's so easy to do.
It won't be dry when first retracted but it's only moist to enable to do the job it's intended for,
When it's time to penetrate its much more easy to penetrate if I pull the skin back over the tip first.
As for sensitivity I don't think it could get any better, and that includes the bit cut men don't have.
I fail to understand why it's done given the risks of things not turning out as it should, such as badly done operations or even bad infection that in a few cases have ended in death.
The big question I ask is why it's really done and is it worth doing when it works so extremely well without it done.
I am currently with a circumcised partner, and I have noticed it is much more difficult to get him to experience orgasm during oral and with a hand job. There's no skin to move, I have to use a lot of pressure, make things super tight with my hands and be really fast. It is so much easier to pleasure an uncut man. I never thought about this topic much until I met someone who was circumcised as an adult. In his case he said that although the orgasm itself was pretty similar, the actual sex itself was maybe only have as good. Before, in his natural state, he said the entire sex act was almost as good as the orgasm and getting cut made intercourse so much less enjoyable and masturbation incredibly frustrating.
Post a Comment