I agree with most of you here.

The choice should be to the owner of the foreskin. This also according to the UN's universal declaration of human rights.

It's bad enough that religion is imposed on children (of course with the parents best intentions but nevertheless)but at least this damage is not as irreversable as chopping of a piece of skin.

The only valid reason would be a medical one.

Furthermore, I think it's a pretty sick habit / culture. WTF are people even thinking mutulating little children? In most civilized countries, female genital mutilation is forbidden, although less damaging, it should be for men as well, just out of the principle that you don't chop off anything untill the victim is at least 18 years old and agrees to it.

You must try a little harder for that. As a hint, expecting me to pop in NJ wouldn't get you in my pants, cuz I don't see myself coming over there anytime soon in my crystal ball.

15 SQUARE INCHES??

Have you ever witnessed a circumcision?

If it's maybe two square inchees I'd be surprised.

15 SQUARE INCHES??

Have you ever witnessed a circumcision?

If it's maybe two square inchees I'd be surprised. [/b][/quote]Actually, I used the smallest number I found in my recent research. I'm not sure if that's infant or adult size, cuz it does seem like a lot either way. Other numbers were over 20 sq inches!

But sq inches are deceiving sometimes. Maybe that's the stretched-out measurement, I don't know. But still...!

If a baby has 15 square inches of fore-skin, then it must be chopped off :p it would be very scary

Maybe an adult measurement...

Thinking about, my estimate of "two" is probably on the low side, but no way is it 15.

The infant's penis is no more than maybe an inch and a half long, and what can the circumference be?

2 x pi x radius x length
= 2 x 3.12 x 0.3 x 1.5
=2.82 sq inches

Multiply by stretch factor of 2 = 5.65 sq inches. No way the fore skin is going to be thrice as big as the entire penis!

OMG this must the first attempt at mathematical porn by anyone

15 sq inches would be what, like 5"x3"? (You know my math is bad!) But isn't that length times width equalling 15? If so, yeah, an infant probably wouldn't have, say, a 4" penis with about equal girth! God knows... cuz I don't wanna be called Infant Dick!

A baby's penis is usually 1.5" x1" meaning 1.5 square inches. 15" is way too big. Maybe they misplaced the decimal point?!

Please... a stud like me was born bigger than that! :p

I guess they must've been talking adult size then... cuz most of the measurements were over 20 sq inches, so.... yeah.

Oh wait, though... that's still huge!!

I bet that's it.

See above.

Maybe they were measuring adult size, and surface area. Cuz surface area would then make more sense. Stretched out as far as it goes.

I swear I read that stat on at least 3 different sites, so....

Sorry, it's late... I gotta CUT outta here!

Good night!

Isn't the number of square inches the same as the surface area?

We're not factoring in the thickness of the skin removed, which is miniscule, so what else could "surface area" mean?

I don't know about that...I've heard many jokes over the years insinuating that British men are quite boring as lovers.[/b][/quote]I could have made a really controversial, rather personal remark here.

I won't.

I can't believe such a debate has raged from circumcision. I'm actually cut (from a very early age and medical reason) and that's RARE in England except for Jews. I've been asked if I'm Jewish and I just do a Jackie Mason or other stereotypical Jewish impression. I aint getting insecure over my body for one moment.

I really don't see the problem or big issue here. Although I slightly lean towards JG's side. What's the point of so many pointless circumcisions in the US? I find it a little wierd.

I am the younger generation, and I have to say, every girl I've ever met who has been with an uncircumcised guy has run to her friends afterwards and said how much it put her off. Bearing in mind all my friends are around the 21 year old mark and are incredibly superficial, but that's the standard response. Personally, I don't care a hell of a lot, but I do prefer the look of them circumcised, which is what most girls base their responses on, the way they look.

There 'ya go, JG.....

Maybe that response will get the ball rolling.

Ha ha!!! And my first post this morning will be on circumcision. (If my parents only knew what I talk about in my spare time )

Truthfully, I am not a woman of "wide range" experience when it comes to this topic. :p I couldn't even tell you what an uncircumcised penis looks like,(no need to post a picture ) thus don't feel qualified to answer, only to say, if we are talking simply about "appearance", I don't think it would matter. And, as far as, how should I put it...performance, I can't imagine it would make a difference.

I really never thought about it, or realized til this thread that it was such a big deal to some men. I thought, for the most part, every male is circumsized at birth.

TIS

Another vote by someone who has never seen one.

It worries me that I've seen more cocks (cut and uncut) than some of these lasses.

I've seen/touched both. Several times.

Surprise.

One thing I don't think has been mentioned that there is little difference in the penis appearance when erect. That is when it really matters, right?

I know of two grown men who got cut as adults mostly for appearance's sake. They were both non-Americans who had moved here to the States. Truthfully, the "after" looked better than the "before" but it really didn't enhance performance at all. I honestly think I have been conditioned by society to think that it looks better "after".

My husband and I actually discussed at length what we would do if we ever had a son. My husband had a good point that he would only want to circumcise his son so that Son and Dad would be the same and not cause any confusion or body image issues for the Son. I stressed that if everyone would stop circumcising penises TODAY - in a number of years being uncut would be the norm.

I honestly do not see the need to perform such a procedure in this day and age when it does nothing to enhance performance. Trust me!

As for hygiene issues - there are plenty of places on a man or woman's body that can fester. Soap is your friend!

Wow. My first post in weeks...or is it months? Bad bout with insomnia last night and I actually found a non-political thread in which I could be passionate about something!

So much talk for foreskin. :p

I've seen/touched both. Several times.

[/b][/quote]Well! You trying to give us a heart attack? A little warning before you come popping back in here would be nice. Some of us old folk can't handle the shock.!

Great to see you back.

You thinking what I'm thinking RRA?

Waferthin beef and ham sub?

LDV !!

So nice to see 'ya.

Just in time for Fantasy Baseball

Thanks. I have been busy and otherwise occupied, what can I say???

I don't understand anything going on on the boards these days!

btw - I didn't see your take on men's penises. You can't tell me you don't have a preference either way....

I can only talk of MY experiences, of course!

Thanks. I have been busy and otherwise occupied, what can I say???

I don't understand anything going on on the boards these days!

btw - I didn't see your take on men's penises. You can't tell me you don't have a preference either way....

I can only talk of MY experiences, of course! [/b][/quote]My take on men's penises? They're too small.

15 SQUARE INCHES??

Have you ever witnessed a circumcision?

If it's maybe two square inchees I'd be surprised. [/b][/quote]15 + square inches- What the hell, did that cut off the poor kids leg!

Sorry Turi....if your post was meant to be a joke, the punchline just went over my head.

Care to enlighten me?