honey, let's face it -- neither of us has a clue what a healthy, whole, functioning body is because we have both been altered. i had no idea for 50 years that i was not a normal, natural woman. now i wonder what it would have been like, to have had a natural body. i suspect i might have bonded with a man and have had a family and children.
if you ever had a lover who was circumcised, you might notice a big difference between her and other women. men used to tell me, "you're DIFFERENT from other women." i had no idea what they were talking about until i found out about my circumcision.
but i sure could tell the difference between men who had been cut and men who had intact bodies. the cut style didn't work for me at all; the intact did. i didn't understand then what the difference was... now i do. there is a huge functional difference between the denuded glans and the natural penis with foreskin... a significant difference. on the doctorsopposingcircumcision.org website is a very eloquent explanation in video form under 'continuing education'.
so your girlfriends might say they prefer the cut style, but have they tried the uncut style? I think foreskin is the reason why europeans have a reputation for being great lovers. american and european porn, i understand, illustrates the difference. the men move very differently.
the cut penis only has sensors for pressure, heat and friction. glans sensitivity has been measured to be equivalent to the heel of the foot. the intact foreskin, on the other hand, contains tens of thousands of nerve endings that are similar to the nerve endings in the tips of the fingers and the lips. the cut man needs to push down to stimulate the foreskin remnant, the frenulum... the woman needs him to push up toward the clitoris. he needs to move hard and fast and that rubs her raw. i believe circumcision is the cause of an unnecessary 'war between the sexes'. it's tragic.
the prepuce/foreskin is similar to the eyelid, and you know how smart an eyelid is. it KNOWS when something is threatening it. and it QUICKLY moves to protect the eye. it keeps the eyeball moist and clean. an eyeball without its eyelid would soon dry out and lose its ability to see well.
the foreskin is very smart, like the eyelid. it senses where the man is in the act of intercourse, where the woman is, and it adjusts movements accordingly, so that sex works well for both lovers.
the foreskin is self-lubricating, like the eyelid. the inner foreskin has a mucosal surface. natural sex -- his mucosal tissue touching her mucosal tissue -- is much like french kissing. extremely sensuous -- electric.
you might like the equipment you have now. but if you ever start having trouble with it -- and a lot of men do start having trouble -- at different ages -- some very young -- then you might want to change your mind about foreskin restoration. it helps men who have lost their ability to feel or have erections or orgasms, to have the glans covered and to regenerate some of the nerve endings they have lost. it feels better for the woman too.
the most sensitive part of most men's penises is the frenulum remnant on the bottom of the glans... you were supposed to have fifteen square inches of skin with feelings that exquisite. men who have been intact, then cut as adults, then restore, say that they get most of it back. and many who were disabled in that way, regain their sexual health and happiness.
as for all the reasons you have heard to justify circumcision? do more research, please. i can find no legitimate medical reason for circumcising infants... and neither can any national medical organization in the world. each medical claim/excuse has been disproved -- one right after the other. 80% of the men in the world are intact and healthy. the US is 37th in the world in health, and it leads the industrialized nations in both circumcision AND HIV.
if you read leonard glick's chapter in 'understanding circumcision' (
i am growing weary of setting this record straight.
every time i hear someone say that FGM is 'worse' than MGM, i get sick to my stomach. NO baby deserves to be cut. NO child deserves to be cut. NO adult deserves to feel as if he/she is "less than" because they were NOT cut. NO one should be shamed or guilted into cutting themselves or their children.
there are forms of FGM that are analogous to MGM. there are forms of MGM that are as atrocious as the worst forms of FGM. and there are worse things people do to kids too.
i was clitoridectomized, hoodectomized, and nymphectomized (lost clitoris, hood and labia) to MDs in KANSAS in the 1950s. and i am a WASP female. i've written an entire book about it. "the rape of innocence" -- at amazon.
and i work with people to help them clear their fear, their trauma. so i personally don't think there's much point in debating the pros and cons and who wins the prize for the 'worst' genital cutting. i think it's all atrocious, barbaric, SO middle ages or even before, and needs to be STOPPED immediately. what on earth is a modern country doing, cutting babies genitals? i am beginning to think the 'kink' factor is far greater than the 'health' claims. who on earth is so obsessed with babies' genitals that they insist on cutting them? this is very, very sick stuff.
"circumcision" or whateve you care to call it, tortures and traumatizes everyone connected with it. even the practitioners have to steel their heats, close their hearts, so they can do it. nurses hate it. doctors hate it. parents have to go into denial. children protest, even tho adults will swear that the baby LIKED it... just like rapists, child abusers swear that the children they abuse liked it. it's childhood sexual abuse to the max.
everyone deserves to have a whole, healthy, functional body... males and females. everyone deserves to be safe and protected, loved and respected... males and females.
get with the program. protect babies. protect children. don't let anyone cut them. they don't deserve to be treated like that.
Slashdot Mirror
honey, let's face it -- neither of us has a clue what a healthy, whole, functioning body is because we have both been altered. i had no idea for 50 years that i was not a normal, natural woman. now i wonder what it would have been like, to have had a natural body. i suspect i might have bonded with a man and have had a family and children.
... now i do. there is a huge functional difference between the denuded glans and the natural penis with foreskin... a significant difference. on the doctorsopposingcircumcision.org website is a very eloquent explanation in video form under 'continuing education'.
if you ever had a lover who was circumcised, you might notice a big difference between her and other women. men used to tell me, "you're DIFFERENT from other women." i had no idea what they were talking about until i found out about my circumcision.
but i sure could tell the difference between men who had been cut and men who had intact bodies. the cut style didn't work for me at all; the intact did. i didn't understand then what the difference was
so your girlfriends might say they prefer the cut style, but have they tried the uncut style? I think foreskin is the reason why europeans have a reputation for being great lovers. american and european porn, i understand, illustrates the difference. the men move very differently.
the cut penis only has sensors for pressure, heat and friction. glans sensitivity has been measured to be equivalent to the heel of the foot. the intact foreskin, on the other hand, contains tens of thousands of nerve endings that are similar to the nerve endings in the tips of the fingers and the lips. the cut man needs to push down to stimulate the foreskin remnant, the frenulum... the woman needs him to push up toward the clitoris. he needs to move hard and fast and that rubs her raw. i believe circumcision is the cause of an unnecessary 'war between the sexes'. it's tragic.
the prepuce/foreskin is similar to the eyelid, and you know how smart an eyelid is. it KNOWS when something is threatening it. and it QUICKLY moves to protect the eye. it keeps the eyeball moist and clean. an eyeball without its eyelid would soon dry out and lose its ability to see well.
the foreskin is very smart, like the eyelid. it senses where the man is in the act of intercourse, where the woman is, and it adjusts movements accordingly, so that sex works well for both lovers.
the foreskin is self-lubricating, like the eyelid. the inner foreskin has a mucosal surface. natural sex -- his mucosal tissue touching her mucosal tissue -- is much like french kissing. extremely sensuous -- electric.
you might like the equipment you have now. but if you ever start having trouble with it -- and a lot of men do start having trouble -- at different ages -- some very young -- then you might want to change your mind about foreskin restoration. it helps men who have lost their ability to feel or have erections or orgasms, to have the glans covered and to regenerate some of the nerve endings they have lost. it feels better for the woman too.
the most sensitive part of most men's penises is the frenulum remnant on the bottom of the glans... you were supposed to have fifteen square inches of skin with feelings that exquisite. men who have been intact, then cut as adults, then restore, say that they get most of it back. and many who were disabled in that way, regain their sexual health and happiness.
as for all the reasons you have heard to justify circumcision? do more research, please. i can find no legitimate medical reason for circumcising infants... and neither can any national medical organization in the world. each medical claim/excuse has been disproved -- one right after the other. 80% of the men in the world are intact and healthy. the US is 37th in the world in health, and it leads the industrialized nations in both circumcision AND HIV.
if you read leonard glick's chapter in 'understanding circumcision' (
every time i hear someone say that FGM is 'worse' than MGM, i get sick to my stomach. NO baby deserves to be cut. NO child deserves to be cut. NO adult deserves to feel as if he/she is "less than" because they were NOT cut. NO one should be shamed or guilted into cutting themselves or their children.
there are forms of FGM that are analogous to MGM. there are forms of MGM that are as atrocious as the worst forms of FGM. and there are worse things people do to kids too.
i was clitoridectomized, hoodectomized, and nymphectomized (lost clitoris, hood and labia) to MDs in KANSAS in the 1950s. and i am a WASP female. i've written an entire book about it. "the rape of innocence" -- at amazon.
and i work with people to help them clear their fear, their trauma. so i personally don't think there's much point in debating the pros and cons and who wins the prize for the 'worst' genital cutting. i think it's all atrocious, barbaric, SO middle ages or even before, and needs to be STOPPED immediately. what on earth is a modern country doing, cutting babies genitals? i am beginning to think the 'kink' factor is far greater than the 'health' claims. who on earth is so obsessed with babies' genitals that they insist on cutting them? this is very, very sick stuff.
"circumcision" or whateve you care to call it, tortures and traumatizes everyone connected with it. even the practitioners have to steel their heats, close their hearts, so they can do it. nurses hate it. doctors hate it. parents have to go into denial. children protest, even tho adults will swear that the baby LIKED it... just like rapists, child abusers swear that the children they abuse liked it. it's childhood sexual abuse to the max.
everyone deserves to have a whole, healthy, functional body... males and females. everyone deserves to be safe and protected, loved and respected... males and females.
get with the program. protect babies. protect children. don't let anyone cut them. they don't deserve to be treated like that.
thank you for reading this rant. :)