To cut or not to cut.
Slim, I just don't get the uncut dick facination, except for the fact that you have one too! It is such a rarity in the U.S. that I never got used to it. I used to think boys who were uncut must come from poor families who could not afford to pay the doctor for the circumcision because we only had a couple of guys at my high school (I saw them in the locker room) who were not cut and they were from poor families. It was not until I was grown that I realized Europeans were not cut. When I was a
Freshmen in college there 120 boys on my floor in the dorm, using a communal shower room. Only one out of 120 was uncut. But hey, if that turns you on baby, go for it. At least you live in Europe where you can get all the uncut dick you want! For that, I am happy, for you!
Dear LoganBroad,
Near universal circumcision only began in the US by some insistence of Pediatricians that the families were infact giving their bouncing baby boy an advantage over those not circumcised. Following WWII, circumcision rates were in the stratosphere here in the US while in England began declining because they felt they had greater health priorities to attend to following the war. At the time before the war, England was out if sync with the rest of Europe who reserved circumcisions to those required by their religion.
People need to realize that just because it is a medical decision to be made, it doesn't require everybody to fall in line. Uncircumcised guys need to give their penis a little extra attention when bathing and that is it. Having a foreskin is a result of evolution and nature doesn't create add-ons when none is needed. Therefore, for those lucky guys whose parents in the US wisely decided to let well enough alone, I say "MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU! YOU CHOSE WISELY AND ALLOWED YOUR SUN TO MATURE INTO ADULTHOOD WITH ALL THE EXTRA SENSITIVITY BEING UNCUT ALLOWS FOR. In the 20's and 30's, it was believed that if guys were less sensitive resulting from their glans being exposed more, guys would be less inclined to masturbate or be sexually irresponsible. Obviously,
that message did not take!
Also, keep in mind that during WWII, uncut draftees or enlistees had an extra step to go through in reporting for duty. It seems that for the benefit of the "entire nation and the war effort itself", these poor bastards were treated to a second "GI haircut" that had little to do with removing excess hair, rather they removed excess skin from their dicks without having so much as a choice in the matter. Doesn't that make you proud to be an American!
My half-brother was French and was born in 1940. He was born in a hospital in Paris and, as the norm, was not circumcised at birth. He immigrated to the US following WWII at age 6 along with my mother accompanied by her new husband from the US. However, with the extreme pressure so commonplace in the US back in the 1950's to "
CONFORM TO HIS PEER GROUP WHEN PUBERTY SET IN", HE FOOLISHLY BOWED DOWN TO THE STATUS QUO PRESSURE AND CONSENTED TO BEING CIRCUMCISED FOR NO PARTICULAR HEALTH-RELATED REASON OTHER THAN TO "FIT IN AND BE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE"(meaning in the US).
I had an American father and, although he never revealed to me when he was circumcised, he felt perfectly justified to having my foreskin lopped off as if it was some
6th finger/deformity at my birth without even a second thought. While I don't waste much time stewing over "spilled milk, as it were", I will always greatly resent the unnecessary medical risk taken at my birth with my penis. Also, I greatly resent his feeling so free as to modify my anatomy without me having the possibility of having any choice in the matter.
So LB, I too along with Slim share this fascination and appreciation for the 100% natural and untampered with penis, just as both "
God" and "
nature" intended it to be. I consider them both to be "
pretty reliable sources". Foreskins are defiinitely not the equivalent of a "factory defect" or "obsolete technology". I understand and make allowances for a religous requirement, but I also find it rooted in the centuries intended for "
desert dwelling nomads". It seems to me that in the last two thousand or more years, things have changed somewhat and I resent personally someone feeling they have to adhere to a "
tradition for the sake of tradition".
When and if I meet God at the Pearly Gates, I don't think there will be two lines for male souls, "
with" and "
without a foreskin". But, if this actually transpires, surely the "
uncut" souls line will have the luxury and advantage of being in the express line, if for no other reason but the overwhelming numbers of "
Uncut, healthy, and happy souls". The "
cut souls" will have to account for the missing hardware, no doubt somewhat like the IRS. Then, a statement of accounting for the missing hardware will have to be presented to a "
celestial notary public" with a sworn statement of the loss and your signature, all done in triplicate and bearing the "
notary's official heavenly seal and signature" in a certified tamperproof envelope. It seems "Circumcision" creates a lot of unwanted
red tape when applying for your "
eternal reward".
Take this as a warning!
Sincerely,
Stimpy
