My wife and I have been married for 6 years.She never has told me she has a problem with my uncircumcised penis.Yesterday she asked,"Do you ever think about getting circumcised"?And the discussion went on.It seems she doesn't like my uncircumcised penis.I've done a lot of reading online about this today.A study actually said that circumcision removes 20,000 nerve endings from the penis.And it is widely reported that uncircumcised men have more sensitivity.Im upset and confused.I do not want to get circumcised.My wife actually claimed to have told me this before.Her brother got circumcised years ago,and she claims to have talked to me about getting circumcised when she told me about her brother.That had to have been a one sentence or something of that nature and not a full conversation because I would have remembered it.So do any men have experiences with their wives wanting them to get circumcised?Any women prefer an uncircumcised penis?Why?Have you ever told a man you wanted him to get circumcised?
Wife suddenly wants me to get circumcised...I think this is ridiculous
Jack I
- Status
81 - 100 of 193 Posts
In many cases the effects of circumcision for males don't reveal themselves until much later in life. As men live past fifty, the flip side becomes apparent when the feeling leaves during intercourse and that which used to take work to keep from happening in five minutes or less, then takes as much as an hour to happen and in some cases never happens for men.
The disadvantage then becomes that his partner may have reached an age where they don't want to be doing it, anyway so it becomes one more reasion for denial.
The disadvantage then becomes that his partner may have reached an age where they don't want to be doing it, anyway so it becomes one more reasion for denial.
Joined
·
7,866 Posts
Blame me.... and the fact that I am biased toward my husband's penis.... I think that's what derailed it in the first place.
However, I will reiterate: Jack, if you have no medical reason, no problems with your penis, then do not do it just to make her happy... IF, in fact, she was even serious about it. I have my doubts about that. I truly suspect she threw out an outlandish request, merely as payback for the anal request (badgering)... OH! here's a thought! Draw up a contract! Tell her that you will get circumcised, if she will consent to anal. AND, get it notarized. Legal document, neither can back out....
(no, people, I don't mean that. I was being sarcastic)
Jack, don't get it done. Yes, I have stated my preference. But I will also state that I would not... I repeat WOULD NOT ask a man to get circumcised just to make me happy.
Now, some have stated that I am shallow because, as RD pointed out, I have *spousal bias*. I have zero intention of having sex with any man other than my husband, for the rest of my life. So, really, my preferences are moot. My preferences are related to the man in my bed...the man I married...who happens to be circumcised.
Joined
·
305 Posts
I am another one. How many do you need?
Are you serious about the nerve endings including pleasure centers? Maybe I don't quite understand what you mean by pleasure center. I am quite certain those nerve endings include "pain centers". Having been denied those nerve endings against my will I never be able decide for myself if those nerve endings provide pleasure. There are however many millions of men who will state they feel pleasure from those nerve endings.
Joined
·
305 Posts
Blame me.... and the fact that I am biased toward my husband's penis.... I think that's what derailed it in the first place.
However, I will reiterate: Jack, if you have no medical reason, no problems with your penis, then do not do it just to make her happy... IF, in fact, she was even serious about it. I have my doubts about that. I truly suspect she threw out an outlandish request, merely as payback for the anal request (badgering)... OH! here's a thought! Draw up a contract! Tell her that you will get circumcised, if she will consent to anal. AND, get it notarized. Legal document, neither can back out....
(no, people, I don't mean that. I was being sarcastic)
Jack, don't get it done. Yes, I have stated my preference. But I will also state that I would not... I repeat WOULD NOT ask a man to get circumcised just to make me happy.
Now, some have stated that I am shallow because, as RD pointed out, I have *spousal bias*. I have zero intention of having sex with any man other than my husband, for the rest of my life. So, really, my preferences are moot. My preferences are related to the man in my bed...the man I married...who happens to be circumcised.
Personally, I love the look of my circumcised husband, and I would never get involved with a man who is not circumcised.
The bolded line from a previous post in this thread is what I believe has ruffled some feathers. Of course you would never ask a man to get circumcised to make you happy. How could you? Who would you ask, the pizza delivery guy? You would never be involved with a man who is not circumcised. You would never have married your husband unless he was circumcised.
If a man were to make such a statement such as "I would never get involved with a women who is not/does not have/does not do xyz," many would accuse him of being shallow. You may not be one of those. I hope you are not. That would make you a hypocrite, and I am certain that is not the case.
Clearly "female circumcision or FGM" as it is understood is more severe than MGM. Does that make it OK ?
MGM is not benign.
Joined
·
2,822 Posts
Just curious "Jack" there are posts referring to you previously wanting anal sex with spouse and it no going over well. My husband is uncircumsized also and anal sex was quite frankly..oww..oww.. and double oww at first. He is large to start with and longer than most...that extra skin makes him even thicker. Extra lube and take slow at first and now it is very enjoyable.
I would recommend you sit down with her and dicuss both issues. If ypu are not comfortable with getting cut tell her. Ask her why she would ask and that it offended you. Comunication...communication.
Posted via Mobile Device
I would recommend you sit down with her and dicuss both issues. If ypu are not comfortable with getting cut tell her. Ask her why she would ask and that it offended you. Comunication...communication.
Posted via Mobile Device
I actually make a pretty good effort to wash down there.Even more so in the last couples of years when I read an article saying uncircumcised men have to make more of an effort to keep that area clean.
Joined
·
7,866 Posts
You are correct. If a man doesn't want a woman with large breasts... don't get involved with a woman with large breasts. If a man doesn't want a woman with tiny breasts...don't get involved with a woman with tiny breasts. My husband was born and raised Jewish. I knew of the bris they had on the 8th day, even before we married. And, when he and I met, people weren't all up in arms over male circumcision like so many are now. Maybe had he not been circumcised, I might be saying differently. I really don't know. I never saw uncircumcised until after we married, and doing searches because of the controversy over it. Seeing the difference... I prefer how my husband's looks. But faulting a man if he prefers one breast size over another? Or something similar? No, I don't. Personal preference is just that...personal preference.
Joined
·
36,030 Posts
I have a friend who has a male horse who is a gelding. Apparently due to them having being gelded, they need help with cleaning of their equine male member. By hand.
Just thought I'd mention that!
I wouldn't say so..Yes I was pissed off about the lack of anal sex.But I don't think she would try to "retaliate" in this way.
Joined
·
36,030 Posts
I think you are being mean, Jack. I think you should acquiesce to her perfectly reasonable request that you be circumcised. Just so long as she agrees to a female circumcision at the same time!
Unless there's an issue of hygiene or some physical problem your being uncircumcised causes her?
Joined
·
7,866 Posts
Pissed off? Mild understatement. You believed you were ENTITLED to it...to the point that you had actually entertained the idea of seeing a prostitute just to get what you wanted. Fortunately, you didn't go through with that, or if you did, you never posted about it. And never brought THAT subject up to her either. She probably would have cut it off right then and there, had you said you were going to pay for it, just to have your way!
Jack, there are a few of your threads I have seen no resolution to... just...trailed off/abandoned. Have you come clean to her about your "happy ending" lap dance?
Did you ever decide what was being done with her sister's child (did you adopt her or let her go into foster care)? Ummm... oh, and your issue with "lasting"... I saw a couple of threads about this. One was asking if having more sex would really help you last longer, I believe. So, did ANY of those issues ever get resolved? And is MIL still living with you guys?
Well we actually discussed the anal issue at length.I still feel the way I feel,but there's no point in us keep to discuss when she already said no....There were some arguments that resulted from my anal sex requests and it was the beginning of a rough patch.We are doing better now.Some have suggested that my wife is trying to "punish"me by getting me circumcised...I don't think this is the case.I don't think she is still all that upset over me bugging her about the anal sex....She doesn't have a history of trying to "get me back"when I do something she doesn't like....
Joined
·
2,822 Posts
So how did she ask the question...was it just in passing or was it a request for you to setup the appointment? My husband has complained a lot about he wishes he had been circumcised. ..cleanliness is a real issue, it is very easy to get bacterial rashes when not circumsized. I asked him once if he ever really considered it...said "heck no to painful". That was the end if the conversation...I wasn't asking cause I wanted him to do it done was just wondering it really bothered him.
Posted via Mobile Device
Posted via Mobile Device
Unfortunately the child has been placed in foster care.It was somewhat of a mutual decision.And I'm still dealing with the premature ejaculation,and we aren't having sex everyday as I was talking about in the other thread.Mother in law still lives with us and it makes the sex kind of awkward, as I feared would be the case.But it is still good.
Joined
·
305 Posts
OMG really? How has our species survived for millions of years? How do the billions of men in the world survive that have not been subjected to MGM ? Why don't all the other species with forskin get all these bacterial rashes? My dog must have better hygiene.
My favorite joke:
Why do dogs lick their balls?
Because they can.
Sounds like your husband could use more oral. :smthumbup: or a yoga class.
Well I didn't tell her about those things because it would have been very foolish to do so.We were trying to work things out.That would have been maybe the dumbest thing I could do.I doubt we would have made the progress we've made in the last month or so if she had known these things.And she was just saying something last week to her friend about how she doesn't understand why married men go to strip clubs,so of course I wasn't going to bring that up.
Joined
·
5,469 Posts
Your analogy doesn't hold. A woman who suffered through FGM still might have some enjoyment, and can conceive a child through PIV sex.
A man without a penis can't do either.
Joined
·
154 Posts
sorry Jack for the thread jack and I'm with everyone else on the advise that you should only EVER do it if it was your OWN decision to do so.
As for the rest of the debate, I'm chiming in not to say one is less worrisome than another - just a few observations I've made on this matter. A few posters seem quite traumatized and emotionally moved about the issue and I have no right to judge that.
For some reason many forms of society/religion have advocated that male circumcision = more accepted and favourable. I come from a religion that neither advocates nor dismisses it so I'd say to each his own...
However, I must say that I stand by the observation that many more circumcised men I've seen seem generally less traumatized in adolescence/adulthood by the procedure (unless they had a medical nightmare) than the women who've had to undergo FGM.
I think most of it comes down to how the procedures are carried out. In the western world, I'm guessing that many of the circumcision procedures are carried out under sedation by the expertise of a medical professional in hospitals. On the other hand, I assume FGM is not carried out in hospitals since its illegal.
I am aware that this is not the case for many young boys in the underdeveloped world and I feel they must undergo exactly the same trauma as a girl undergoing FGM.
However, I have never seen any reports where girls have ever had the luxury of sedation and hospital wards for their FGM. The only videos I've seen of FGM are of 7-12 year old girls being forcefully pinned down by their female family members while an older lady does extremely crude painful stuff down there.
If done medically and with some respect for the child undergoing it (for whatever reasons - religious or otherwise) such practices would definitely reduce trauma to the child by leaps and bounds, but not everyone world over seems to want to do it that way. Some scary looking older adult using a crude unhygienic knife and needle on you without any form of painkillers/sedation while everyone else in your family pins you down is the worst form of child abuse (in my books) - whether the child is a boy or a girl.
I think the reason this debate springs up is because in the bigger picture, a percentage of male boys circumcised are subjected to it in this crude manner while most (if not all) girls subjected to FGM have to undergo FGM very agonizingly.
Having said this, one must also agree that the reasons behind circumcision or FGM have age old chauvinistic reasons behind them.
The boys being circumcised are being done so in the apparent hope that they could go on to have a better/more hygienic sexual life in future.
The girl's genitals being mutilated are so that she doesn't become promiscuous or develop sexual feelings as its sinful to do so for her in general.
As for the rest of the debate, I'm chiming in not to say one is less worrisome than another - just a few observations I've made on this matter. A few posters seem quite traumatized and emotionally moved about the issue and I have no right to judge that.
For some reason many forms of society/religion have advocated that male circumcision = more accepted and favourable. I come from a religion that neither advocates nor dismisses it so I'd say to each his own...
However, I must say that I stand by the observation that many more circumcised men I've seen seem generally less traumatized in adolescence/adulthood by the procedure (unless they had a medical nightmare) than the women who've had to undergo FGM.
I think most of it comes down to how the procedures are carried out. In the western world, I'm guessing that many of the circumcision procedures are carried out under sedation by the expertise of a medical professional in hospitals. On the other hand, I assume FGM is not carried out in hospitals since its illegal.
I am aware that this is not the case for many young boys in the underdeveloped world and I feel they must undergo exactly the same trauma as a girl undergoing FGM.
However, I have never seen any reports where girls have ever had the luxury of sedation and hospital wards for their FGM. The only videos I've seen of FGM are of 7-12 year old girls being forcefully pinned down by their female family members while an older lady does extremely crude painful stuff down there.
If done medically and with some respect for the child undergoing it (for whatever reasons - religious or otherwise) such practices would definitely reduce trauma to the child by leaps and bounds, but not everyone world over seems to want to do it that way. Some scary looking older adult using a crude unhygienic knife and needle on you without any form of painkillers/sedation while everyone else in your family pins you down is the worst form of child abuse (in my books) - whether the child is a boy or a girl.
I think the reason this debate springs up is because in the bigger picture, a percentage of male boys circumcised are subjected to it in this crude manner while most (if not all) girls subjected to FGM have to undergo FGM very agonizingly.
Having said this, one must also agree that the reasons behind circumcision or FGM have age old chauvinistic reasons behind them.
The boys being circumcised are being done so in the apparent hope that they could go on to have a better/more hygienic sexual life in future.
The girl's genitals being mutilated are so that she doesn't become promiscuous or develop sexual feelings as its sinful to do so for her in general.
Joined
·
305 Posts
Zig, I respect your thoughtful post but I have issues with several of your points.
As many state the forskin is not just some unnecessary loose skin. It is a protective shield for the naturally mucus membrane called the glands. When it is removed it fundamentally changes the nature of the glands. It essentially dries up, and becomes more like normal skin with less sensitivity. Ever had dry toung? This loss of sensitivity may be a benefit for PE in you 20s and 30s, but becomes a huge problem in your 40s and beyond. It takes more and more pressure and friction to excite those nerve endings. Unless a women is very consistent with kegels the vagina is just not tight enough to provide the necessary stimulation. This is one of several reasons many men begin to prefer masturbation, anal and find the need for more intense and psychologically stimulating sex acts. Good old PIV just doesn't cut it anymore like it used to.
It is not common practice to use effective anesthesia on newborn infants in the US for several reasons. Topical is not very effective and general anesthesia is very risky especially for a newborn. The procedure costs money and insurance companies don't want to pay for it. The medical community has been under intense pressure recently to change its scientific stance and "recommend" MGM, because insurance companies increasingly will not pay for the procedure because it is not medically necessary.
Sure the the physical pain caused by MGM is barbaric because it is so unnecessary except in rare cases, but getting squeezed out of a garden hose is not very comfortable either. The bigger issue is the trauma caused later in life that your sexual organs were mutalated causing disfunction AGAINST YOUR WILL. By people making a PROFIT off your suffering. You cannot deny the profit motive for hospitals in the US and religous leaders generally do not charge explicit fees for their services, but "tokens of appreciation" are expected. The accepted practice of hospitals selling the forskin to tissue brokers can also not be denied.
All in all the deck is fairly stacked against a male infant, at least in the US.
As many state the forskin is not just some unnecessary loose skin. It is a protective shield for the naturally mucus membrane called the glands. When it is removed it fundamentally changes the nature of the glands. It essentially dries up, and becomes more like normal skin with less sensitivity. Ever had dry toung? This loss of sensitivity may be a benefit for PE in you 20s and 30s, but becomes a huge problem in your 40s and beyond. It takes more and more pressure and friction to excite those nerve endings. Unless a women is very consistent with kegels the vagina is just not tight enough to provide the necessary stimulation. This is one of several reasons many men begin to prefer masturbation, anal and find the need for more intense and psychologically stimulating sex acts. Good old PIV just doesn't cut it anymore like it used to.
It is not common practice to use effective anesthesia on newborn infants in the US for several reasons. Topical is not very effective and general anesthesia is very risky especially for a newborn. The procedure costs money and insurance companies don't want to pay for it. The medical community has been under intense pressure recently to change its scientific stance and "recommend" MGM, because insurance companies increasingly will not pay for the procedure because it is not medically necessary.
Sure the the physical pain caused by MGM is barbaric because it is so unnecessary except in rare cases, but getting squeezed out of a garden hose is not very comfortable either. The bigger issue is the trauma caused later in life that your sexual organs were mutalated causing disfunction AGAINST YOUR WILL. By people making a PROFIT off your suffering. You cannot deny the profit motive for hospitals in the US and religous leaders generally do not charge explicit fees for their services, but "tokens of appreciation" are expected. The accepted practice of hospitals selling the forskin to tissue brokers can also not be denied.
All in all the deck is fairly stacked against a male infant, at least in the US.
Joined
·
154 Posts
yes... If the procedure is being carried out in ways that do not involve basic integrity -ie. done by medical professionals, with use of sedation and basic privacy for the child involved...then its barbaric - be it girl or boy... and I'm guessing it would be equally painful for both...
I am not aware of how much sedation they use for infants in hospitals since anaesthesia is used on newborns & neonates during other medical procedures/surgeries etc....
as for whether its necessary/beneficial or not... I personally dont have an opinion on it...I'd leave it to individual choice
I am not aware of how much sedation they use for infants in hospitals since anaesthesia is used on newborns & neonates during other medical procedures/surgeries etc....
as for whether its necessary/beneficial or not... I personally dont have an opinion on it...I'd leave it to individual choice
81 - 100 of 193 Posts
- Status
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
