• Circumcised or foreskin

    1381855196
    rose hip [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 1212
    • Joined: 19 Aug 2010

    Fluffbags wrote:

    I watched something a while ago, and while this information is probably not accurate (I am just remembering what i read, and considering my memory is soooo crap)

    I think it was to do with the transmission of an STD in africa. One village, who circumsised the boys at an early age, had a LOT lower transmission rate of this virus, when compared to the village one mile (or something) up the road. They worked out it was something to do with the cells in the foreskin, harbouring this virus, whereas the circumsised village had barely any reports of this virus. Wish i could remember what it was I watched now. Cant even remember the virus, or the figures.

    Was it an overview programme of BBC coverage of sexual issues through the decades? Or something like that. Maybe Panorama?

    The research mentioned in that programme looked at two neighbouring regions in SE Africa with vastly different rates of AIDS. The areas matched up closely with circumcision practices. They compared it with an area in west African which also had circumcision and lower rates.

    General cleanliness isn't the explanation for why. It has to do with a higher concentration of a particular type of white blood cell in the foreskin. They're called Langerhans cells and they grab antigens in order to activate the immune system. Because the foreskin is prone to tearing, it's very likely that the cells will come into contact with the HIV antigen during unprotected sex with a carrier and take the HIV into the body. And of course HIV prevents the immune system from fighting it off effectively.

    There are also studies which indicate lower rates of cervical cancer amongst women whose partners are circumcised.

    1381855273
    Fluffbags [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2236
    • Joined: 18 Oct 2011

    Gentle giant wrote:

    Fluffbags wrote:

    I watched something a while ago, and while this information is probably not accurate (I am just remembering what i read, and considering my memory is soooo crap)

    I think it was to do with the transmission of an STD in africa. One village, who circumsised the boys at an early age, had a LOT lower transmission rate of this virus, when compared to the village one mile (or something) up the road. They worked out it was something to do with the cells in the foreskin, harbouring this virus, whereas the circumsised village had barely any reports of this virus. Wish i could remember what it was I watched now. Cant even remember the virus, or the figures.

    Anyway, my preference is uncut. I have experienced a circumsised guy, and I found it awkward to give him handjobs, I always felt I was going to hurt him as there was nothing to "slide" with. :S My partner is going to be circumsises soon, due to phimosis. I guess I will have to get used to it, as will be obviously!

    It is HIV and your memory is execellent. The maps were over lapped for cut tribes and hiv infected tribes and they nearly perfectly matched. How ever this is due to poor sanitation and poor personal hygiene. Allso if you could see how they do circumcision in these area's you would not wish it on your dog. Its as bad as Female circumcision in Somalia. Iam of my band wagon know and we are talking about modern western countries where we have a choice

    Surely the hygiene and sanitation would be the same in each village? (It wasnt like one village was clean and the other dirty) yet the only differences were cut and uncut. Meaning it was specifially caused by foreskin vs no foreskin, rather than clean or dirty. Although, I am no expert and can barely remember the film so I am not exactly sure. (I am not arguing that having a foreskin is dirty btw, they can be equally as clean as a circumcised penis and as mentioned, I prefer uncut, but honestly, if i loved the guy I would not care either way) but yeh, that video popped into my head when I read this thread. I don't agree with circumcising babies and for any other reason than it has to be done for health reasons, but I also agree with you that people should have a choice and do what they want.

    1381856454
    Stuburns [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 1860
    • Joined: 23 Nov 2011

    Or the virus was already in the other village to start with and because the villages didn't have cross village sex. That is unless everyone was fully tested before hand.

    1381857324
    blonde vixen13 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2115
    • Joined: 23 Jun 2012

    I've only ever had one circumcised partner and I didn't like it! But then again, I don't like change.... So it was prob because it was new to me and I was nervous about how to ' play' with it lol

    1381857342
    Fluffbags [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2236
    • Joined: 18 Oct 2011

    rose hip wrote:

    Fluffbags wrote:

    I watched something a while ago, and while this information is probably not accurate (I am just remembering what i read, and considering my memory is soooo crap)

    I think it was to do with the transmission of an STD in africa. One village, who circumsised the boys at an early age, had a LOT lower transmission rate of this virus, when compared to the village one mile (or something) up the road. They worked out it was something to do with the cells in the foreskin, harbouring this virus, whereas the circumsised village had barely any reports of this virus. Wish i could remember what it was I watched now. Cant even remember the virus, or the figures.

    Was it an overview programme of BBC coverage of sexual issues through the decades? Or something like that. Maybe Panorama?

    The research mentioned in that programme looked at two neighbouring regions in SE Africa with vastly different rates of AIDS. The areas matched up closely with circumcision practices. They compared it with an area in west African which also had circumcision and lower rates.

    General cleanliness isn't the explanation for why. It has to do with a higher concentration of a particular type of white blood cell in the foreskin. They're called Langerhans cells and they grab antigens in order to activate the immune system. Because the foreskin is prone to tearing, it's very likely that the cells will come into contact with the HIV antigen during unprotected sex with a carrier and take the HIV into the body. And of course HIV prevents the immune system from fighting it off effectively.

    There are also studies which indicate lower rates of cervical cancer amongst women whose partners are circumcised.

    Yes! That was the one I watched. xx Thanks for the imput. I could not remember half of what you did! lol xx

    1381857406
    Mr Gooner [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major
    • Posts: 199
    • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

    I have a foreskin and I don't believe just because I have one makes me any less hygienic then some who has no foreskin.
    I wash regularly and make sure I'm always clean.

    I think the test they done in Africa is a pointless one aswell.
    It's almost seeming like it's saying, get a circumcism as it will lower your chances of getting HIV.

    1381857765
    Fluffbags [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2236
    • Joined: 18 Oct 2011

    Mr Gooner wrote:

    I have a foreskin and I don't believe just because I have one makes me any less hygienic then some who has no foreskin.
    I wash regularly and make sure I'm always clean.

    I think the test they done in Africa is a pointless one aswell.
    It's almost seeming like it's saying, get a circumcism as it will lower your chances of getting HIV.

    The study was not trying to say that men with foreskins are dirty. There is obviously nothing "dirty" about the foreskin, it is a normal part of the body and if you keep clean, you keep clean. Rose explained the program much better than I did. It is due to the foreskin being able to tear and .....what Rose said basically. It seemed to be very true in the studies they did. (Of course, it was just one program and I can't say it is or not, i just watched the program lol.)

    Having a circumcision seemed to indeed suggest a lowered chance of transmisson of HIV in those areas. but those countries don't practice safe sex either, there is a chance of transmisson of STDs whether you have foreskin or not, male or female...etc etc, if you dont practise safe sex. x

    1381858280
    Gentle giant [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2477
    • Joined: 12 Sep 2010

    Fluffbags wrote:

    Mr Gooner wrote:

    I have a foreskin and I don't believe just because I have one makes me any less hygienic then some who has no foreskin.
    I wash regularly and make sure I'm always clean.

    I think the test they done in Africa is a pointless one aswell.
    It's almost seeming like it's saying, get a circumcism as it will lower your chances of getting HIV.

    The study was not trying to say that men with foreskins are dirty. There is obviously nothing "dirty" about the foreskin, it is a normal part of the body and if you keep clean, you keep clean. Rose explained the program much better than I did. It is due to the foreskin being able to tear and .....what Rose said basically. It seemed to be very true in the studies they did. (Of course, it was just one program and I can't say it is or not, i just watched the program lol.)

    Having a circumcision seemed to indeed suggest a lowered chance of transmisson of HIV in those areas. but those countries don't practice safe sex either, there is a chance of transmisson of STDs whether you have foreskin or not, male or female...etc etc, if you dont practise safe sex. x

    Hey guy's bring it back it is meant to be a pref, thread . Because of my rant we've gone off thread

    me I like my fore skin just feels good , young boys dont get a choice and we should let them choose for them selves, unless medicaly they need one.

    1381858419
    Fluffbags [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2236
    • Joined: 18 Oct 2011

    Yeh that is my opinion too (it should be a choice the lad makes when he is old enough to decide for himself.)

    1381860082
    likitreview [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Captain
    • Posts: 30
    • Joined: 21 Feb 2013

    Cool thread lots of opinions which is always interesting I was cut from an early age so never really known any different sexually.

    But I do have early memories of feeling embarrassed around the other boys in the school changing rooms,

    My oh says she much prefers it and I think I do too so just as well I suppose

    1381860753
    Mr Gooner [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major
    • Posts: 199
    • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

    I wasn't aiming my comments at anyone.

    I remember a programme that was on BBC 2 I think some years back where they were talking about foreskins in America. A lot of them were horrified to know that people have foreskins and just thought it was dirty.
    Personally I think it's like anything. You keep clean and hygienic then you will have nothing to worry about.

    1381861669
    Fluffbags [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2236
    • Joined: 18 Oct 2011

    Mr Gooner wrote:

    I wasn't aiming my comments at anyone.

    I remember a programme that was on BBC 2 I think some years back where they were talking about foreskins in America. A lot of them were horrified to know that people have foreskins and just thought it was dirty.
    Personally I think it's like anything. You keep clean and hygienic then you will have nothing to worry about.

    I think I saw that! I was quite shocked! I guess it's a case of "what you get used to" as in America most guys have it done, so an uncut one is the unusual. Whereas here it is more the opposite way around.

    1381861906
    JoFemSub18 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major
    • Posts: 17
    • Joined: 8 Oct 2013

    I much prefer them to have foreskin as i find it easier to masterbate them. Does anyone else have trouble trying to write things without being crude? Lol :)

    1381863079
    Mr Gooner [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major
    • Posts: 199
    • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

    Fluffbags wrote:

    Mr Gooner wrote:

    I wasn't aiming my comments at anyone.

    I remember a programme that was on BBC 2 I think some years back where they were talking about foreskins in America. A lot of them were horrified to know that people have foreskins and just thought it was dirty.
    Personally I think it's like anything. You keep clean and hygienic then you will have nothing to worry about.

    I think I saw that! I was quite shocked! I guess it's a case of "what you get used to" as in America most guys have it done, so an uncut one is the unusual. Whereas here it is more the opposite way around.

    I think it may have been a programme when these blokes were buying these life like dolls. Literally spending thousands on them. Sorry going off topic here
    1381864448
    rose hip [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 1212
    • Joined: 19 Aug 2010

    Gentle giant wrote:

    I have heard that in some countries ( like america) that unless you are cut as they put i,t then they will not have intercoarse with you.

    How much of that is talk? A fair number of men state in the shaved/natural threads here that they'll only have oral with a woman if she's bare down there. If they liked someone well enough though, would they really limit themselves that way?

    From the sounds of that programme, they seemed to have wandered into (or sought out) an area where people didn't have a lot of variety. One pleasant encounter might be all that's needed to change a mind.

    My preference? Whatever's attached to a really great guy.

    1381866431
    Gentle giant [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2477
    • Joined: 12 Sep 2010

    rose hip wrote:

    Gentle giant wrote:

    I have heard that in some countries ( like america) that unless you are cut as they put i,t then they will not have intercoarse with you.

    How much of that is talk? A fair number of men state in the shaved/natural threads here that they'll only have oral with a woman if she's bare down there. If they liked someone well enough though, would they really limit themselves that way?

    From the sounds of that programme, they seemed to have wandered into (or sought out) an area where people didn't have a lot of variety. One pleasant encounter might be all that's needed to change a mind.

    My preference? Whatever's attached to a really great guy.

    Thanks for your opinion and you are welcome to have themI actually worked on a nato base and have 1st hand experience of being told on 3 seperate occasions by American ladies.

    1381867090
    SophieM [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 1305
    • Joined: 16 Dec 2012

    Can't say I've experienced both. However, I find a circumcised penis more attractive to look at. Foreskins wierd me out a bit when it's flaccid.

    1381872132
    saucey21 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Brigadier
    • Posts: 146
    • Joined: 19 Mar 2013

    I've had both, in my limited experience. i can't really say i've noticed any difference in my pleasure but as others wanking was difficult without a foreskin.

    and hygiene is hygiene either way.

    1381885807
    Janny [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 716
    • Joined: 17 May 2011

    Is it really a big deal? I'm uncut - it's not really the norm in Europe to cut if not for religious beliefs or health issues (like foreskin too tight). Once you get hard, or have sex, it rolls back anyway.

    1381893489
    Incendiaire [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Colonel
    • Posts: 155
    • Joined: 19 Sep 2011

    I always associate circumcised pensises with porn, because that's the only place that I really encounter them, so on the rare occasions when I find one in real life it's always a bit of a novelty to play around with.

    I don't really have a preference either way so long as it looks nice, is a decent size, and the guy knows how to use it.

    Post a reply to this thread

    Please sign in to post messages to the forum.