• If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Uncircumcised

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • curiouskatie
    started a topic Uncircumcised

    Uncircumcised

    There appears to be women that don't mind uncircumcised penis and others to whom it is bothersome. The standup comedian Amy Schumer has said during her standups that she does not like uncircumcised penis. What is your opinion and reason for choice for uncircumcised or circumcised?

  • Beautiful Disaster
    replied
    I appreciate those of you who have tried to redirect this thread back to its original intent. WH will not tolerate any posts that are derogatory toward any race or any class of people. As a result, this thread is now closed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stillness
    replied
    Originally posted by checkers View Post
    I have been with those who were and were not, really not much difference. Actually, my husband was uncircumcised when I met him, and needed to have it done several years into our marriage due to a medical issue (balanitis). Our sex life has not been affected. I just felt bad he had to go through it in his early 30s - OUCH.
    Interesting.

    Did he say whether it affected his pleasure at all? Also WELCOME!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • checkers
    replied
    I have been with those who were and were not, really not much difference. Actually, my husband was uncircumcised when I met him, and needed to have it done several years into our marriage due to a medical issue (balanitis). Our sex life has not been affected. I just felt bad he had to go through it in his early 30s - OUCH.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stillness
    replied
    Originally posted by atskitty2 View Post
    If you would like to start another thread on additional topics, please do so.
    If the discussion of circumcision is exhausted let's end the thread and begin new.
    https://www.womens-health.com/boards...meone-a-racist

    Leave a comment:


  • amy40
    replied
    xxxxx



    Leave a comment:


  • WaveRider
    replied
    amy40,

    During informal conversation -posts on an Internet forum are informal cybersation- topics will transition as new information is introduced. That's the way people talk.

    I'll get back on topic: I'm cut. Granted, a barbaric physician dulled 3 scalpels before resorting to a 2-stroke chain saw to complete the unconscionable act of mutilation by removing my foreskin. But he managed to make me presentable to women with minimal risk of transferring disease or infection. I do have a keen sense of humor.

    As I've indicated, all I know is what women have told me. I've yet to hear a single woman tell me that they prefer uncircumcised. I have had women tell me that they'll never again have sex with an uncircumcised man.

    My g/f and my friend's g/f had a convo about this topic about a month ago. I didn't listen to the whole convo, but the down & dirty is that neither preferred uncut.

    There exists medical evidence that uncut causes vaginal infection and transmission of pathogens that cause disease. Those are more than substantial reasons to go with mutilated penises.

    Leave a comment:


  • WaveRider
    replied
    Originally posted by cathygirl View Post

    Racism is the belief that one race is superior or inferior to another. Preferring members of one race or another as more or less attractive as a romantic partner is far from racism. That, I believe, is quite normal. I think people need to be less reckless in hurling the label "racist" around.
    Hi cathygirl,

    You're 100% right.

    An Anglo woman who does not want to date black men out of preference is not racist. She merely does not prefer to date black men.

    Leave a comment:


  • WaveRider
    replied
    Originally posted by jns View Post

    Previous hijackings of planes were generally not of the "take the flight down and we all die" type. In the 4th plane (flight 93), the passengers had actionable intelligence. Only one person, Barbara Olson, had such intelligence on flight 77 and probably was not able to communicate it to the other passengers who were herded to the back of the plane. Remember, it took CNN and CBS about 15 minutes after the second crash to conclude it was terrorism. I saw the second crash live and knew instantly that it was terrorism and that the USA was at war. Flight 93 passengers not only had the intelligence but had sufficient time and were left on their own to a degree so they organized a revolt. In general, the government had taught passengers to be passive in hijackings so as to have the greatest number of people survive.
    Hi JNS,

    We might never know what info passengers had. However, it is indisputable that the hijackers had deadly intentions, and not a "man" on any of the first three planes stood up to them. That response was conditioned and intended by social norms that have infiltrated American culture to its detriment. Of late, we've seen Black Lives Matter punks beating up white victims, one a decorated US Marine, and not a single person stepped up to help the victims. BTW, infliction of great bodily injury or attempt to inflict great bodily injury justifies use to deadly force. Even in gun-hating CA, people can use deadly force to prevent serious bodily injury to themselves or others.

    There was no excuse for "men" on any of the first three airplanes, especially pilots, to meekly surrender their lives and lives of women and children. There is no credible defense for their inaction. None. If you can sell it to yourself, I'm good. But I ain't buying it.

    Try a Google of, "Feminization of American men," and see what pops up. I have friends who are far more condemning of American culture by agenda-driven feminists calling it the "pussification" of American men.

    The blame for inaction of men on the first three flights lies with feminists who despise the thought of American masculinity.

    There is a 50 cent word (misogyny) for men who hate women. I know far more women who hate masculinity than men who hate women. Also, domestic violence in which women are suspects is grossly underreported. My guess is that were men to report their victimization by their wives, the numbers would approach equilibrium.

    Gunphobia is another disease that is helping to destroy American culture society. Do Americans really believe that gun control will prevent a single crime? Can anyone prove that any gun control law has prevented any crime including murder. I could easily prove the converse, that denying law abiding Americans to protect themselves with guns have resulted in their murders. Americans become that gullible. They'll believe what they're told, facts be d-a-m-n-e-d.

    I've read treatises authored by psychiatrists who have opined that people who have irrational fear of guns suffer mental illness. I have no fear of guns or law abiding people carrying handguns. I could care less whether the guy next to me in a grocery store has a .38 under his shirt. He isn't going to shoot me. It's the criminal with a gun whom I fear. But he'll never surrender his gun, which law prevents him from possessing. If a criminal is going to shoot me, I'd feel a whole lot better about dying were I able to fight back.

    Criminals would love to see gun confiscation in America. Make every single gun illegal to possess, and criminals will be in hog heave. You'd have to be pretty darn naive to think that criminals would surrender their guns. That'll never happen. Criminals will always have guns. That's why they're criminals. Politicians who deny Americans their RIGHT to life by denying them ability to carry handguns for self-defense are despots who fear people with guns.

    The destruction of American culture and society is by intent, not by random chance.

    "When people fear their government, there is tyranny. When government fears its people, there is liberty."
    ---Thomas Jefferson

    Leave a comment:


  • jns
    replied
    Originally posted by cathygirl View Post

    Racism is the belief that one race is superior or inferior to another. Preferring members of one race or another as more or less attractive as a romantic partner is far from racism. That, I believe, is quite normal. I think people need to be less reckless in hurling the label "racist" around.
    She dated two "black dudes". She found them attractive enough to date. Attractiveness wasn't the reason for her preference. Their being uncircumcised was, but instead of swearing off dating intact guys, she instead swore off dating guys of a certain race. That is why I said that she was racist. BTW, a racist person can date and even marry someone of a race that they are racist against.

    Leave a comment:


  • cathygirl
    replied
    Originally posted by jns View Post

    The woman who was the center of this comment is using race as a basis to reject men for dates so by definition she is racist.
    Racism is the belief that one race is superior or inferior to another. Preferring members of one race or another as more or less attractive as a romantic partner is far from racism. That, I believe, is quite normal. I think people need to be less reckless in hurling the label "racist" around.

    Leave a comment:


  • jns
    replied
    Originally posted by WaveRider View Post
    After 9/11, I read an excellent article the thesis of which was the outcome of feminizing American men. Out of four planes, only four men on one plane fought back. "Men" on the other three planes were willing to allow women, children, and themselves to die without so much as a whimper. They were not real men. They were girly men.
    Previous hijackings of planes were generally not of the "take the flight down and we all die" type. In the 4th plane (flight 93), the passengers had actionable intelligence. Only one person, Barbara Olson, had such intelligence on flight 77 and probably was not able to communicate it to the other passengers who were herded to the back of the plane. Remember, it took CNN and CBS about 15 minutes after the second crash to conclude it was terrorism. I saw the second crash live and knew instantly that it was terrorism and that the USA was at war. Flight 93 passengers not only had the intelligence but had sufficient time and were left on their own to a degree so they organized a revolt. In general, the government had taught passengers to be passive in hijackings so as to have the greatest number of people survive.

    Leave a comment:


  • amy40
    replied
    curiouskate started this thread but didn't come back to conversation
    figures a one time poster gets a multiple posting thread!

    Leave a comment:


  • amy40
    replied
    Originally posted by atskitty2 View Post
    This thread is about circumcised and uncircumcised.
    Carry on...
    guess I prefer husband

    Leave a comment:


  • jns
    replied
    Originally posted by Stillness View Post
    You seem to run in some irrationally racist circles.
    This has led the conversation sideways. The woman who was the center of this comment is using race as a basis to reject men for dates so by definition she is racist. There is no basis that she is part of a group that thinks similarly nor that WaveRider is part of such a group. I can agree that her thinking is irrational as there are perfectly nice guys of every background that are circumcised and also those of every background who practice good hygiene. Her preference for circumcised guys is prejudiced by the results of her past encounters.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X