[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I've got blisters on my.....penis!



Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 12:50:40 -0400
From: "O'Neal, Kevin W." <Kevin.ONeal@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
	>From: Alan McKendree

it's simple common sense: the more friction any body part encounters, the thicker the epidermis >will become. Guitarists equipped with fingertips can testify to that. It's true of hands, feet, >and anything else covered with skin.

Oh please. Are you suggesting that circumcised men have calluses on their peckers?

No, I'm suggesting that the skin in question is thicker and less sensitive in circumcised members. That not the same thing as having a callus. Nor is it saying the skin is numb, or non-functional.


Not. You're sounding as militant on this issue as some of the "don't cut" web sites that are out there.

You could call it militant, I could call it having an informed opinion. I read up on it about a decade ago and came to the conclusion that it's a ridiculous and frequently (complications in 10% of cases) harmful (up to and including total loss of the member) custom. I haven't really paid much attention to the issue since, but found http://www.infocirc.org with about 30 seconds of searching, which seems like a good source of info for the curious. The idea that a normal body would require surgery at birth seems quite bizarre on its face, and *is* regarded as bizarre by Western cultures in the case of female circumcision. Meditate for a moment on just why it should be that routine circumcision for a female seems repulsively backward and barbaric, but for a male is accepted without a second thought.


For those who never agonized with this decision (it's really the first and toughest choice you have to make *for* your son), there's a host of web sites out there that try to make you feel like a criminal for even *thinking* about circumcision. Their tone turned me off pretty quick.

Of course you would think about it, having grown up in modern America.


I was completely open minded, and not at all into the "I want him to be like me", or "it's my religion" arguments. We waffled back and forth, and the thing that pushed us both was the smegma thing,

Too bad your information source didn't mention it's easily prevented. Sort of like surgically removing the skin of your armpits at birth because they will develop an offensive smell. Oh, unless you wash occasionally? Yes, I guess you could do that instead...


but more importantly the "if you *do* eventually need to get circumcised, it is violently painful". I dunno. No one knows. We'll never know. It's all good.

I'm trying to imagine just why a man would actually medically *need* to get circumcised, and then how miniscule the probability of that event would be. As for violently painful, it's clearly painful for an infant. I'll leave it to specialists in brain development to compare the experience in a 6-day-old brain vs. that of a grown man.


daily friction

Boy Howdy! I'm gaining a new found respect for you Alan! Pictures of Lilly, or the real deal?? ;-)

Anything short of hoop skirts that will prevent arrest for public indecency results in friction. Try wearing jeans with no underwear every day for a week or so. You'll notice the difference the first day -- because there's more friction. By the end of the week, you won't, because your sensitivity will decrease. QED.


Let me end my portion of participation in this thread by stating....
Even if true, I'd be willing to bet women *don't* want their men to have more sensitive penises. :-)

Well, then you can increase the domestic harmony by trying the jeans trick above.


Cheers,
Alan
"the average Texan...carries not just a gun but a SHOTGUN." --Pete Townshend, 1967