From what I have been told, both personally and medically, uncut is usually more durable and more sensitive (not always, there are always personal variations.)

My Man is over 50, and we have sex frequently (at least once a day) and often it does last several hours, especially in the evening or on weekend mornings. I guess I wear him out. But, I know uncut guys who have frequent sex and a lot of it, and they don't have this problem.

It actually gets so bad for him, that we have had to take 2 and 3 day breaks. Poor guy.

For years I had yeast infections and UTIs that put our sex life on hold for a few days at a time, but lately (the last few years) he tends to have more problems with this. I think the tissue that is exposed (most of it would be protected by a foreskin) just doesn't regenerate as quickly as when he was younger, and also skin tend to thin out as one ages. less

I just seem to always know guys who are uncut, or only seen uncut, and that's what I'm used to. I don't really have too much a preference, though.

If i ever have a child and it's a boy, I won't have him cut though. He can choose than himself when he's older. less

P'Gell:

Interesting - I'm both a little jealous and relieved! I would surely love to see if I could keep up with that pace of sexuality - but a little relieved that I'm not letting my girl down - she doesn't have that level of drive.

I rarely have UTIs - but I did get one recently and having aggressive sex with my lady definitely played a part. I had just completed a very long hard bike ride (think suppressed immune system) - but couldn't resist having sex. While my wife was riding me cowgirl style - it was like I fell her driving fluids into my urethra.

When we were done I failed to void my bladder - to flush my urethra - it lead to worst UTI I ever had - lesson learned! less

Calling someone's appearance gross is a little much. I understand opinions, but I be careful with such words?

I find cut a little, well, cut. It is genital mutilation. Some cut guys I like the look of OK, though. I understand there are different cutting techniques? less

I always heard it's safer to BE circumcised, because I heard uncut is always more prone to infections and whatnot. My husband has never had a problem with his penis so far being sore or raw or anything. I had always planned if we had a boy, they would be circumcised for health reasons too. I have never heard a downside to being circumcised. Guess I will have to check into it more, and think about it harder, before I end up having kids. less

Actually, the data doesn't really show that uncut men are any more prone to infections. Yes, they need to take care of their penises, and it is slightly more complicated than caring for a cut penis, but no more difficult than caring for and keeping a vagina clean.

"Keeping clean and avoiding disease" are two of the excuses used for Female Genital Mutilation, and we all know that vaginal care isn't that complicated.

The "Studies" done in Africa, regarding HIV and circumcision (I've read them and read a LOT of criticism of them by European and even American medical professionals) do NOT apply to either the type of HIV common in the USE nor the lifestyles of most American or European men, AND the results of these studies may well have been skewed by researcher bias who WANTED a certain outcome.

In Industrial and Post Industrial countries, men who are not circumcised face no more threat of disease or illness than circumcised men do. And both decrease of sensitivity and continued irritation of the penis is much more common in cut men.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has agreed that there are NO health benefits to circumcising children and even many insurance companies won't pay for it, citing it as "cosmetic surgery."

Please see nocirc and nurses against circumcision video Mothering Magazine articles for more information on this.

There are at least four different commonly used techniques used in the USA for circumcision and the technique used CAN make a difference in outcome. At least 2 to 3 little boys, (reported. there are probably more which go unreported. It really IS a BIG deal to do this to a child.) have their penis destroyed by the circumcision procedure every year in the USA. These little babies have to often have reconstructive surgery, or in some cases, an actual "reassignment surgery" is done to make them look "more like girls" as it is nearly impossible to recreate a real penis surgically, if most of the penis was destroyed. There isn't much there to cut on a newborn baby, and mistakes are made frequently. As a nurse I REFUSE to participate in this ritual under any circumstance.
.
.
. less

I've only been with circumcised men, but I don't really have a preference sexually speaking since it wasn't the person's choice if they're intact or not I think that'd be a bit harsh for me to judge. If my husband had been uncirced it wouldn't have mattered to me. Luckily he has a loose enough circumcision so it's not too tight. I have to say that maybe I would like non circumcised more because they're intact and don't have that scar and would have the extra foreskin to play with.

As for cleanliness, if the man showers there shouldn't be an issue with cleanliness. It's no different than a woman's labia, you wash it and it's fine. My sons are intact and they have no extra work..they're 4 and 5 and can handle cleaning their penises just fine so I'd think a grown man could. Swish Swish in the bath/shower and done. If an intact man smells it's because they have bad hygiene, not because they're intact.

I think that our bodies are perfect with what we're born with and that includes foreskin, I think it's terrible that we still routinely circumcise baby boys in this country, it really saddens me because there is no medical or health reason for doing this! Luckily the rates of circumcision have dropped dramatically and most pediatricians no longer push it, or even recommend it. less

You're right. The individual man most likely never had the choice. I think people should allow their boys to choose for themselves. Most of my friend's boys are uncut, it just isn't done commonly in our area anymore, Thank God.

Good for you on letting your boys be the way they were born. (As you can see, I feel really strongly about this. One of the reasons is I have SEEN circumcisions, and their "bloody hamburger" aftermath, I've heard babies scream so hard, they pass out, I've seen the heart rate monitor go through the roof, I've seen babies "check out" emotionally for DAYS after the damage was inflicted on them, and there is NO earthly reason to do that to a baby.)

The latest stats are that only about 50% of newborns in the USA are now cut, so there is no fear of "shower room teasing." As a young friend of mine who was in High School, (who was uncut) and the subject came up once told me, "If you even LOOK at an other guy's dick in the shower room, it's not cool. To make a COMMENT about an other guy's dick? I can't imagine who would do that. Nobody says anything, you keep your eyes to yourself, and your comments to yourself, too."

The whole "being teased in the shower room" is bullshit, as far as I know. Even back in the 60s and 70s, when My Man was in school he said, "Nobody says anything about other guys cocks."

In fact, when I was pregnant for the first time, and I said, "If it's a boy, we are NOT having him circumcised."

He said, "Well, let's wait and see if he has one. I don't even know if I did." I was totally confused.

"Have one?" I said, "If he's a boy, he's going to have a PENIS!"

My Man said, "No, the skin thing. I don't even know if I had one."

I almost fainted. "OF COURSE you had a foreskin, all boys do. Your parents had it hacked off!" He didn't even know that all men had them.

He said, "Well, you know, when you peek, some guys have that skin and some guys don't. I thought maybe some guys are born without them." He was not informed about this, as is the norm with too many guys his age.

But, the "no cutting" decision was made by me. less

Thanks Alicia and P'Gell for all the technical information. I had no boys in my family. All sisters, so this subject never came up for me. We hardly ever even had a dad/step dad around. Then when I met my husband, and he was circumcised and his brother was and his dad was and it was no big deal and all that, I just thought, well I guess our boys will be too. And anytime I ever watch porn, you RARELY see guys who aren't circumcised, so again, I just thought it was more popular to BE circumcised. I have nothing against uncut people, because as someone pointed out, yes it's not their choice. I just am more physically attracted to cut penis'. They usually appear bigger too. I've only seen porns with uncut, not in real life, but based on that, they are usually long and skinny, where cut ones have the "mushroom top look" where it's bigger at the top and they usually appear thicker too. I've never had experience with both in real life though, so I can't honestly compare. I was just curious as to what people preferred and what people have been with. less

Well, actually when a penis is erect they should both look the same. A large penis will look large whether it's intact or not and a small penis will look small whether it's intact or not. The mushroom tip is still there, it just hasn't had all the foreskin cut from it. If anything I'd say that the intact penis would be the one to have more girth since the skin is sliding over the shaft where on a circed penis that skin has all been cut off. The men in the porn might have indeed just had thinner shafts.


Back in past generations it definitely was "the norm" for men to be circumcised. So, I think that most adult women and men will think of it as the norm since when they were born it was. Nowadays though more and more people are educating themselves before doing this to their children. I think we'll see even more boys being left intact because most doctors (in many areas..can't speak for all) are now educating their patients about why it's not necessary and so parents aren't having to go out and research on their own, the research is being brought to them which gets the word out much more efficiently. less

I don't have a preference for myself.

However I DO wish My Man had not been circumcised, because I think it did him harm. He gets sore and rough spots on his penis from a lot of sexual contact. It can be quite painful for him, and I know men who are not circed usually don't have this problem at his age. The exposed glans causes him pain and discomfort and I wish his parents had thought ahead, instead of "I want him to look like his dad."

The other night, after the poor man had fallen asleep, after several hours of love, I was washing the toys and setting the bed to rights and I looked over at him and noticed his poor penis was just inflamed and raw in spots. He was sound asleep, but I knew he'd feel it in the morning. I got out the hydrocortisone and took care of him while he slept so he wouldn't be in so much pain the next day.

It does really make a difference, especially in an older man, who has had a lifetime of exposed glans and frequent sex. Poor guy.

I know no son of mine would ever be cut. less

Back when my dad went to school he said no one ever noticed his penis (he's intact) but he said there was a stigma that people left intact were poor because back then that was the main reason why people didn't have it done. My grandma and grandpa were farmers, they could have afforded a circumcision but no one in their family ever had it done so they just didn't see the point.

My mom wanted my brother circumcised, even though my dad was against it. But, back then (1973) it was considered to be cleaner to do it. I grew up just thinking it was the norm because I had worked at a daycare and had two nephews and had only ever seen one boy that was intact and he was intact because his parents had just come from Poland. It wasn't until I was pregnant with my son that we looked into it. At first we thought sure we'd circumcise him because that was "the norm" but then when we looked into it we saw that finally people were getting wise and like you said it's about 50/50 and that number is starting to gain in the intact side..which is AWESOME! I'm so glad that we researched it before doing something that is irreversable for our sons.

I think a lot of the arguments that are pro-circ are BS actually. The locker room thing like you said...really who is going to look that closely at another boy/man's penis? The "he has to look like his dad" thing..I can honestly say that was never an issue for my dad and my brother..they didn't ever sit around comparing their penises and my husband is cut and my sons are not and the boys have never questioned why it looks different..I mean of course it looks different..it's a grown man's penis!! They just see a penis as a penis and don't care if there is skin or no skin. Then of course there's the "it's cleaner" or "it takes more work if they're intact" and no and no. There's no extra work at all..you don't even mess with it until it loosens on its own and by that point the child takes care of it themselves. And it's not cleaner..a dirty penis is a dirty penis whether it has foreskin or not and a clean penis is a clean penis.

Even that study done in Africa in regards to HIV was skewed because they didn't account for the time it took the person to heal from the circumcision (aka less time to have sex) and also the fact that African women don't find circumcised men as attractive so they had less sex and therefore had less chance of being infected. There is an article that explains it MUCH better than I can especially since I read the article years ago..but that's the basics of it. less

Thanks Alicia and P'Gell for all the technical information. I had no boys in my family. All sisters, so this subject never came up for me. We hardly ever even had a dad/step dad around. Then when I met my husband, and he was circumcised and his brother was and his dad was and it was no big deal and all that, I just thought, well I guess our boys will be too. And anytime I ever watch porn, you RARELY see guys who aren't circumcised, so again, I just thought it was more popular to BE circumcised. I have nothing against uncut people, because as someone pointed out, yes it's not their choice. I just am more physically attracted to cut penis'. They usually appear bigger too. I've only seen porns with uncut, not in real life, but based on that, they are usually long and skinny, where cut ones have the "mushroom top look" where it's bigger at the top and they usually appear thicker too. I've never had experience with both in real life though, so I can't honestly compare. I was just curious as to what people preferred and what people have been with. less