♥What about male infant circumcision? (old thread)

Submitted by Hyzenthlay on
Printer-friendly version

I was talking with my sister the other day about her decision to NOT have her new baby boy circumcised. I had never really given this issue much thought, but after speaking with my sister I immediately went online and read a few articles about the potential psychological, emotional, and sexual damages that can result from this practice.

What I learned really shocked and horrified me, and I found myself wondering if infant circumcision isn't contributing a great deal to our collective relationship disharmony. I think the title of one article I read really sums it up nicely -- "Ending Circumcision: Where Sex and Violence First Meet."

Basically the idea is that the circumcision (which is really partial castration) procedure is so unbearably painful and terrifying to the infant that it inflicts deep and far-reaching psychological and sexual wounds. This early trauma is then, in a sense, the infant's first sexual experience. What a horrible imprint. Is it any wonder so many of our men our drawn to pornography and fantasies in which the female (mother..?) is bound, gagged, victimized, harmed? This mirrors the baby's earliest sexual trauma.

When a baby is circumcised, he is strapped "spread eagle" to a plastic board, completely restrained. Usually the procedure is performed without any anaesthetic. If you are interested, you can easily find (very graphic) photographs of this online. I found the images to be heartbreaking and frightening -- the babies' facial expressions alone are enough of a testament to how barbaric this procedure really is, nevermind the awful pictures of the mutilated genitalia.

It is now my belief that ending circumcision is a critical step in healing the collective gender rift and becoming whole again.

When I brought this up with my partner, he said that it made perfect sense to him. He said that he had always wondered why he in his sexuality felt drawn to the "female victim" theme, since he is a very kind and gentle soul who in reality would never harm a fly.

We owe it to ourselves and especially to our circumcised males to raise awareness about this issue. I do not think we will be able to fully disentangle the threads of sex and violence without taking a much closer, more critical look at how and why we circumcise our baby boys.

Thanks for posting this

I'd like to feature your letter in our October newsletter and invite readers to comment here, if that would be OK with you. That way we might raise awareness and get others' insights.

What do you think?


I'm so grateful we decided to not have our son circumcised....
it was only last week that I began to worry that he would
feel as though there was something wrong with him, because
so many boys on his swim team (he is 11) have been circumcised.

Thank you for the info Hyzenthlay! (By the way, "Watership
Down" is one of my favorite books.)


Female Circumcision

In the current world climate there is a lot of contempt for Muslim traditions and their culture. Its more often in Islamic societies that female clitoral circumcision has occurred and thankfully it seems to be in a decline. Although to our western mind set it might seem ridiculous, one has to wonder where the custom came from. In this current society where women's liberation is still a hot topic the most assumed reason is that it was a means by which men could subjugate their female companions.

It has also occurred to me that perhaps it was a means of avoiding orgasm. Maybe at some stage they discovered that things got more harmonious when the women were surgically deprived of their sensitive areas.

We will never know either way, unless someone has recorded it somewhere. Perhaps Marnia in her exhaustive research has come across something. Maybe they couldn't quite master the "Sacrament of the Bedchamber" so they got the scalpel out instead.

Either way please don't let it be thought that I am a proponent of the procedure in either man or women.

For some reason I was circumcised as an infant but I have never found it in me to consider that I was gravely injured by the procedure. It was what my parents and society considered prudent at that time and it was carried out with good intentions.

Welcome back from your travels!

I'm afraid I have no light to shed on this one...which I (not surprisingly) regard as one of humanity's darkest deeds.

Thanks for your musings. Western women generally regard female circumcision as "obviously" men's desire to control women (keep them from wandering when habituation kicks in?). But one of the most horrific aspects of this form of cruelty is that women carry it out on their own daughters - like Chinese foot-binding. I think of smug, self-righteous (often) religious women in other cultures (including our own), and see how blind and single-minded they can become, and I *wonder* if men are really to blame here. (I know I can trust Hotspring to argue the other side of this very ably!)

I did learn one interesting thing about female circumcision while living in Europe, where the practice is still common among Middle Eastern immigrants (in fact, the Dutch, at one point, tried to legalize it, in attempt to at least get people to carry out this radical, risky surgery in a hospital...until the outrage of Western women shamed them into nixing the idea). It had nothing to do with Islam. It's "an African thing," which, as Islam spread into Africa, found its way under the Islam tent. It is not practiced by all Muslims.

Whatever its origins - and you may be right, Graham - it's just one more example of how weird humans can get about sex. I think if we were making love in a way that kept us feeling balanced and whole, such practices would never arise for male or female.


I've been there. Don't do it.

After a beautiful home birth my exwife and I had our son circumcised at 7 days. We were there with the young doctor who we chose to do it. Lovingly in support of our beautiful son. Circumcision was the cultural norm for us, I had been at birth also. He was strapped to a plastic board as described and a clamp mechanism that fit over the head of the penis with a screw tightened ring which crushed its way through the foreskin was applied. The doctor was inexorably competent. his nursing staff hid in the outer rooms. we tried to comfort our baby. He screamed and squirmed. I am still retraumatised in my body as I type this, and I still feel sick and horrified when I contemplate my involvement. This is one of the things that I regret the most. it was torturing an infant. My own son who I loved and cherished. That was 27 years ago. Don't do it.

I have gone into my own body memory and felt residual pain in my penis. I have apologised to my son directly while knowing that he would not have any consious memory.(I hope) He even got a bit of his own back by running off with a girlfriend of mine and living with her for a few years. She was a bit younger than me. It's all water under the bridge now. And we are on good terms. I was incredibly enrolled in my societies stupid violence.

My second son was not circumcised.

Tears come to my eyes,and I'd like to be forgiven. but what is done, is done. And whether forgivness happens or not. There is no going back.

That's this fathers views on the subject.

Jewish Circumcision Joke

Two Jews standing at a urinal.
Jew One : I see you are Jewish
Jew Two : Yes how did you know?
Jew One : You were circumcised by Rabi Rabonowich.
Jew Two : That's right. How did you know it was Rabi Rabonowich?
Jew One : Because he can't cut straight and you are peeing on my shoe.

I am not sure, do the Jewish Rabis still do it?

Here's the motivation for female circumcision...

If you scroll down a bit on this page someone talks the case for female circumcision. He even proposes it as a means to avoid teenage pregnancies in the us "especially for minorities".

Watched the documentary you linked to Marnia. I'm keeping my hoody thanks! Though it's smallish by nature so I've been asked before if it was snipped.

On the same site there was a page about people having circumcision fetish's, damn I thought I got turned on by some freaky stuff before but I guess not...


Better and better every time! Wink

I was circumcised at the age

I was circumcised at the age of 2; my parents tell me....and I suffer no complexes about my sexual organs. Neither do most people who get circumcised. As long as you go to somebody who is competent; then its fine and has no drawbacks.

Both are barbaric, but...

Male circumcision was possibly a way of preventing build-up under the foreskin in a hot or humid climate, and then became part of the religious culture in many parts of the world. Though obviously painful at the time, it does NOT and was not intended to reduce male enjoyment of sex later on. Unlike the misleadingly named 'female circumcision' whose SOLE purpose is to take away the most immediate means of sexual gratification from women so that they would not bother to 'stray' from their husbands when they grew up. This is not a cultural issue, it is just plain wrong to genitally mutilate. If we want a fair comparison, it is not with male curcumcision. A fair comparison is, imagine someone had cut the whole head of our penis off. That's the level of violence that is being done to baby girls.

And yet, it is even more

And yet, it is even more absurd that the practice is still carried out seeing as how it is not effective in supressing female desire. I've read a number of books on the subject and some women are still able to orgasm, and some women still do stray from their husbands. This is because sexuality is much broader than the sexual organs themselves.

I read about one culture (and I'm sorry I don't remember which one), that used circumcision as a means to get rid of the male part (the "little penis") of the woman and the female part (the lips, or foreskin) of the male, so that men and women would be completely male and completely female, with no hints of androgeny anywhere.

Let's keep in mind female circumcision happens in our culture as well, both physically and psychologically. Any act that manipulates or seeks to control the divine feminine is female circumcision, in my mind. And there are many ramifications of that.

Infant Circumcision

I was circumcised as an infant and wish that I had not been. I think that circumcision is pointless and I don't like things that are pointless. I lean strongly toward freedom, and I wish that I had been given the freedom of choice over my own body. I have a 16 year old son. He has not been circumcised. I am satisfied that his mom and I made the right decision for us -- to leave both his body and his freedom intact.


I wonder how much trauma actually persists after circumcision. Babies seem exceptionally resilient. If they weren't they'd be traumatized just from birth. In fact, I think they are. For a few days or weeks after he was born, my little nephew (actually first cousin once removed, if I have my geneological calculations correct) seemed a bit traumatized and rather uncomfortable with his new situation in life. However, even something as bad a birth seems to be overcome with little or no lingering trauma. My feeling is that it's different if a grown up was taken, helpless, strapped down, and mutilated. A baby gets over it. They probably are still capable of being permanently scarred, but it'd take more, a lot more, possibly even requiring the traumatization to continue into the period where he or she is old enough to have constructed a concept of right and wrong and stronger sense of self (that can be violated).

All that said, I could be wrong, and regardless, I'm against circumcision. I tend to believe the sensitive bodyworkers I know who've said that any damage to the body creates a hard spot (or whatever) in the psychic body (or whatever). It's not enough to be noticeable to most people, but if you're getting into subtle energy practices, it might be slightly noticeable and dealt with. I don't know, cuz I'm no where near that point yet.

I notice earlier in this thread some people mentioning things like:
[quote]When I brought this up with my partner, he said that it made perfect sense to him. He said that he had always wondered why he in his sexuality felt drawn to the "female victim" theme, since he is a very kind and gentle soul who in reality would never harm a fly.[/quote]
I think a lot of men are like this, myself included, and an alternate theory other than anger at mom's betrayal is repressed masculinity. The masculine strives for power, but modern society often forces us to embody that "kind gentle soul" energy. To some extent, that's just the normal socialization process (subduing the instinctual warrior who kills and, when it comes to sex, takes), but modern society is becoming increasingly against the masculine. Our values are feminizing, and though I think that's a good thing (a great thing, in fact), it makes masculine men repress their instinct, which is never a good thing. Look at where sexual repression in general got us.

The healthy thing to do, then, is to find a healthy expression of masculine energy. All this I learned from the teachings of David Deida. Before that, I felt guilt about my "female victim" fantasies, but now that I know where they're coming from, I can see them as just a shadow, the dark perversion of what used to be something good. Being a kind, gentle soul is good, but I took it too far and let myself be walked over. A true man stands up for himself. He also strives diligently for his dreams. He listens to his woman but makes his own decision. This might not be PC to say, but this kind of gentle strength is a turn on to the feminine. The obsequious puppy dog who mistakenly thinks the way to a woman's heart is by slavishly catering to her every whim is NOT.

As I continue my study of karezza, I hope to integrate these teachings though they seem at odds, with karezza seeming to be about diminishing masculinity, at least in the bedroom. One of Deida's classic examples is a man coming home elated over success at work or something, and his wife tests him by complaining that he forgot to buy milk on his way home. (The feminine does this to test her man's strength. If she can deflate him, so can the world.) Rather than getting mad, the man shows his strength by saying, "I got your milk right here," presses her body against the wall with his, and transforms the negative energy. It's what his woman really wanted. The milk had nothing to do with it, and if done lovingly, the strength is not seen as dominance or subjugation. The opposite in fact. The feminine wants to be swept off her feet by the masculine's unshakeability and integrity.

Can they then have karezza instead of what was obviously leading to the passionate dance of "taking" and surrender? I don't know, but I hope to find out.

Or maybe with regular karezza, this kind of drama is bypassed completely. The masculine/feminine polarization which Deida is trying to free from the yoke of societal repression might fall away on its own. Repression is wrong, but karezza might offer an alternative. It can be embraced if it exists but at the same time not be needed. Well, we'll see how I do once I find a goddess to walk this sacred ground with me. So many lessons to be learned, wonders to be seen!

I agree that

male strength is A GOOD THING. Honestly, though, I don't think these principles of learning about the passion cycle "feminize" men. Gary is more confident than ever...and funny and cocky with me (in fact, far MORE so with me in private than in front of others...he has always been quiet socially). He knows he can speak his mind and that I value his opinion...even when it's not what I want to hear. He helps correct me when I'm off course. For me that's male power, and I find it very comforting.

I have read some of Deida's stuff, and even have an excerpt on the site. However, I've heard some less than wonderful things about his conduct from people who have attended his seminars, so I've kind of cooled a bit...at least until I know more.

Here's what I think he's missing. Strong women love strong men. However, men who are out of whack, because their brain chemistry is not in balance, are simply not safe pilots...no matter how macho they act. They're either like egg shells energetically, or they're rigid and domineering because they're feeling threatened. And they won't know they're off...until they get back in balance and feel the difference. That's a dangerous situation, and I don't know if Deida addresses that risk. He thinks he can teach men maleness. I think they're plenty male...they just have to be able to *feel* it again. Then no coaching is needed.

Meanwhile, no matter how masterfully they throw me against the wall :-), I'm not willing to turn my well-being over to unsafe pilots. Believe me, I tried...even when my intuition was telling me their steering mechanism wasn't working. Of course in those days I was part of the problem by seducing them with orgasm. *chuckle*

But now that I see how much better, stronger, and sounder of judgment men are when they're back in balance, I would be silly to suggest that "play acting" at masculinity is a suitable substitute. There's no substitute for a well-grounded, happy partner. And it brings out the best in me. My inner feminine can relax and be more receptive. Deida's right about that.

Deida apparently generally conserves his sexual energy (but thinks women should orgasm all over the place, as wildly as possible Smile ). His own conservation of sexual energy may make him more charismatic, but I don't think he's in a sustained relationship. In his book that I read he said that women are inevitably moody...because he clearly doesn't know orgasm imbalance can bring out the worst in women, too. Frankly, I think the Coolidge Effect has him by the nuts, based on what I hear. I could be wrong, of course.

Now, maybe Deida is the perfect example of powerful masculinity...but these days it seems to me like his behavior is just another way of being under biology's spell. I want a partner with whom I can make a contribution to others' welfare, not someone who acts the part of a macho male. The first takes real strength. The second...I'm not so sure. In short, I won't be trading Gary in for God's gift to womanhood, David Deida. Wink


Yeah, I suspect he's got some growing to do (never met him), but at the same time is spreading a very important message, which is that we shouldn't suppress our masculinity or femininity. Also that romantic relationship dynamics can be spiritual and used for growth. I haven't heard about him having an overactive Coolidge Effect, but if he did, it wouldn't surprise me. There are some videos online of his seminars, and I definitely detect ego in him, which I think he rationalizes as "tough love," the masculine challenging other men to become all they can be. He's human and has human failings, but who doesn't? His message, however, seems to have integrity, and I don't think he gets abusive or anything. He's still a good guy helping a lot of people, and I think the tough love is the best way he has right now to do it. If so, it's better to use it than to not use it.

I don't think he's teaching men maleness, but rather helping bring out what has been suppressed. Macho is just a cover for fear, and that's probably what you sensed as an unsafe pilot. (Yay! I always cringe when I see women falling for the con or rewarding dog-like behavior in men while nice guys like me get left out in the cold.) He's teaching true integrity, true strength. Now, that would probably go a lot easier with non-orgasm, of course, but that doesn't invalidate what he's doing.

Do you think that by becoming non-orgasmic, a man will naturally bring out the masculine that was suppressed? Or become better able to deal with the feminine when its acting out? If so, then Deida's teaching will only be for people who want to still be orgasmic, and I won't need them anymore. However, I suspect that despite all the positive changes, I could still benefit. Maybe Gary was just always masculine and didn't suppress that side?

Did Deida really say that the feminine is inevitably moody? He definitely focuses on that, even jokes about it constantly, but reading deeper, I've seen that he calls this the shadow side of the feminine, just as macho is not true masculinity. The goal is for both the masculine and feminine to bring their shadow into the light, transform it into the goodness it once was before being perverted by our own insecurity. Again, that process would be a lot faster without orgasm, but the idea is still valid.

What he does say, I believe, is that the feminine wants to be "taken." (And the masculine wants to "take.") It's the dance of power and surrender.

What karezza is telling me is that maybe once out from under biology's spell, this kind of sex loses its appeal, that such things are only intrinsic to masculinity and femininity when in the procreation pattern. Once out, however, though still masculine or feminine, there's a higher level to explore.

In short, I think I can learn a lot from both you AND Deida. It's just that the styles of love-making seem to be at odds. The rest seems compatible, though. If so, I can continue to develop my masculinity but still do karezza. That when Deida calls gender neutral sex "two people rubbing their genitals together in bed," he doesn't know about a level even higher than the passion he advocates. Maybe the need for power or surrender are intermediate steps, things that should not be suppressed, need to be brought out in the light, but are not the end of the journey. Enlightenment is when they're transcended.

Man, how could anyone be jaded when life is full of such wonder and mystery!

Tantra 11 says.......

"..........i could be wrong, and regardless, I'm against circumcision."

Well.....reaching a firm conclusion while not being absolutely sure about the premise upon which the conclusion stands..... leaves me very perplexed. Because - quite simply - a sound conclusion cannot possibly be reached from an unsound premise.

Circuncision is a very ancient tradition and - quite obviously - must rest upon an original motivation. Do You have knowledge of this original motivation? Do You dispute its validity? I would be much obliged to You - and to anyone else for that matter - for kindly articulating the contention supporting the conclusion against circumcision. Thanks in advance for Your input.

jb Mirabile-caruso.


When I said I was against it, I meant how I'd feel in regards to my own children when I have them, not as a general rule I'd impose on others. It has a long tradition, so if someone else wants to do it, that's fine by me, given that I doubt it does anywhere near the harm its opposers talk about.

I'd be interested in what the original motivation was. I suspect it was hygenic, a coming of age ritual, a mark of being from a certain tribe, or a combination of these. None of these seem to be all too valid today.

All in all, it doesn't seem important enough for me to worry about either way, but I know there are very strong opinions to either side. I have no desire to engage in their debate, and only posted because I thought some might benefit from an alternate view.

arrhhh my heart is aching

arrhhh my heart is aching -

its too fucking awful -

my heart truly goes out to everyone who has had this happen and to every parent who was too ignorant/or shut of from their intuition to have allowed this to happen to their sons or daughters...

Another Perspective

I thought I would add another angle on this one. As a male that was circumcised I cant say that there has ever been any adverse side effects that I can discern. I had some involvement in the mens movement for a while and it was almost as if there was some peer pressure to feel that I was violated in my infancy. Being a victim doesn't make much sense to me I am sure that whatever my parents did was in genuine good faith. It was the thing at that time and I refuse to take away from them my complete gratitude for bringing me up in the way that they genuinely felt was best. And in that era and society that is what was considered best.

You also have to consider the item of hygiene. Today we can have a shower every day and there is no problem with the foreskin getting bugs or anything. I think that in some of the Australian special military services they do still insist on their soldiers being circumcised. It might seem ridiculous, but keep it in the perspective that these guys sometimes spend months in situations where there is no chance of getting a shower and they don't have the luxury of a change of clothes. Interestingly in the second world war its claimed that DDT saved the lives of many soldiers compared to previous wars because it could kill all the bugs or whatever that could cause incredible problems to soldiers skin and probably their genital areas. I have also read somewhere that there is a decrease in the rate of transmission of AIDS between sexual partners where the male has been circumcised.

In our western society circumcision of male infants makes zero sense. But then maybe for Mongolian sheep herders spending months in a tent in the Himalayas using yak dung for insulation on their skin it does. And this may have been how the practice grew up.

I also have a friend who had a voluntary circumcision in his twenties because his foreskin was in fact too tight. I remember him talking about how glad he was that he had had it done and the relief it gave him.

So like so much in this world, I don't believe its such a black and white issue.

In the case of Jewish rabbis doing the job on infants it always amazes me how such an intelligent group of people can put up with it. The pressures of religious societies can be so strong.

Thanks, Graham

Always good to hear from you, with your down-to-earth perspective. It's true that parents are usually just doing their best.

For some reason, I've always been especially protective of male genitalia. Even as a child, I forbade my parents to have our male cat neutered, despite his annoying courting habits. I thought he should remain "whole," even though it meant that he got in a lot of fights and suffered quite a bit as a result.


That is very Taoist of you. LOL. I, the strongly anti-Confucianist that I am, am actually kinda Confucianist (I'm apply these terms mostly for the humor... but they do seem to pretty accurately represent the applicable viewpoints) when it comes to neutering pets.

Imagine the benefit if, like male circumcision, humans were also neutered in some state-sanctioned or religion-sanctioned ritual. LOL. No more problems with the passion cycle, dopamine, addiction to orgasm... all the things this site is about! We'd all naturally be oxytocin, bonding type people, instantly able to reach the heights described without the struggle to learn karezza. I've heard of forms of internal Kung Fu especially designed for the eunuchs of the Forbidden City (might just be a myth made up for the movies...). All that internal energy freed up from "wastage" going to procreation. Fantastic!

After I heard about how the Heaven's Gate men were eunuchs and how much better they felt, I found myself slightly attracted to that idea. It would have just made life easier without the nagging sexual urge causing me problems, ruling my thoughts, compelling me to objectify women, and interfering with plain old living life. But of course I never seriously considered it, out of the same philosophy you describe of wholeness. We're born a certain way, and taoistically, it's our karma to live out that pattern, not take the easy way out. (I'm against drugs like anti-depressants and ritalin for the same reason. Depression is there for a reason, a call to spiritual growth, to make changes, to tell you in no uncertain terms that something is terribly wrong and needs to be fixed. That said, there's good use of anti-depressants too.) Also, Murphy's Law states that a new eunuch would meet his twim flame within 3-6 months. Her heart would then break with a cracking sound of cosmic proportions capable of being heard in all ten dimensions. That was why I didn't eunuch-ize myself. Wink

Anyone else here find eunuch-izing himself attractive for these reasons? I had a friend who I must say is even more sexually charged than me (at least judging by the stories he told and feats he described, none of which, thankfully, I witnessed). He kept wishing he could be a eunuch too, and said the only reason he didn't do it was he didn't want to pee sitting down. LOL. I told him about chemical castration, and he shut up. Still, the sex urge can be... annoying, to say the least. Distracting. I always liked it when I'd get a girlfriend, the honeymoon period would end, and I'd feel normal again, able to just go about my business without being tormented by desire 24/7. (Rare luxury for me.) Thank goodness I found this site and did it without castration. Best of both worlds! Better even.

I was just reading

all about castration in an academic (email) list I eavesdrop on. Chemical castration seems like it would be the better idea because it's reversible, but it's WAY more expensive, and may also cause other physical damage to various organs...because it blocks all testosterone, some of which is made in the adrenals (?) and serves other purposes in the body. Surgery leaves the adrenal supply alone.

There are whole websites for eunuchs, some of whom choose it for health reasons (prostate ailments), some because they were molested as children and now have their sexuality oriented toward sex with kids (and don't want to continue the cycle), some to do the transsexual thing, some for the reasons you name. Many are delighted with the results.

However, I learned that transexuals who start taking estrogen discover that it can lead to extreme horniness, too. Human sex hormones "mean business" in the mating department!

Like you, I prefer the challenge of learning to balance what I have. For one thing, it has led to such fascinating discoveries!

It's a rare person who realizes that sexual desire can actually be a nuisance. But an even rarer person who realizes that we can be fully alive without being sexual hounds all the time. We tend to think it's one (horny and lively) or the other (calmer and comatose).

Deadening our life force energy to solve the "sex problem" just *can't* be the right answer, if our life force energy is also our spiritual energy. Forced rechanneling is apparently one way (kundalini) to solve the challenge, but synergy between the sexes is another. So far so good.


I didn't know about the eunuch community. Some men actually castrate themselves just to get rid of their sex drive? Yeesh! I understand the men with prostate or pedophilia problems as well as transexuals, but... Anyway, I'm so glad there's an alternative to "horny and lively"/"calmer and comatose"!

Circuncision is a very

Circuncision is a very ancient tradition and - quite obviously - must rest upon an original motivation. Do You have knowledge of this original motivation? Do You dispute its validity? I would be much obliged to You - and to anyone else for that matter - for kindly articulating the contention supporting the conclusion against circumcision. Thanks in advance for Your input.

Cutting and Scarification

are important parts of many rites of initiation. It is symbolic of separation from the womb of childhood into the world of the adult with all of it's rights and privileges. Particular types of scars identify the tribe. Infant wounding, whether it is circumcision or ear piercing, is cruel and wrong. Wait until the kid asks for it and then fully explain the procedure, benefits, and risks.

I very much doubt many kids

I very much doubt many kids would ask to be genitally mutilated!!

I also have no idea why humans would ever want to stick toxic metal through their skin via piercings or penetrate their skin with toxic dyes via tattoos! Most of my dearest friends have piercings and tattoos and they also know my thoughts Wink

just because something is a 'tradition' personally does not mean a thing to me!

I think that many of us in the west like to glorify tribal behaviour as being wise/natural but I personally think the whole globe shows signs of crazy behaviour - including tribes that are more connected to their natural environment.

I come from the school of thought that the universal myths and legends of a 'fall from grace' are real and that currently most of human behaviour is a symptom of insanity - cutting and scarification is right up there as insane in my world -

I don't mean to be petty, but...

well, I happen to be a tattooed person, more heavily than most, and still less than others. Most people that I've met in the last few years don't even know this about me, which makes me giggle to myself. Tattooing in the west in the last century was not an attempt to recreate traditional, tribal behavior. It was a sign of rebellion, of non-conformity. I believe that many of us here naturally fall into the category. Our mass-consuming culture today recognizes a market for this, so now we package and sell synthetic non-conformity as though it were a commodity. It has lost its meaning. It's more rebellious to just be normal, which I really try to do, but with little luck. :)

I appreciate that you have an opinion about this, and that to you it seems like a sign of crazy, but personally, I've never met a single person that didn't have some weird habit that I thought was certifiably insane. It is those things that endear people to me as it allows me to recognize their humanity, not to be used as a means to separate myself from them.

"I appreciate that you have

"I appreciate that you have an opinion about this, and that to you it seems like a sign of crazy, but personally, I've never met a single person that didn't have some weird habit that I thought was certifiably insane"

Hi discordia - I am sorry - I truly did not mean to offend - and I totally agree with your comment - trust me I show many signs of insanity :)

Most of my dearest friends have tattoos some of them are covered in them too and I love them all dearly...I still think it is crazy to inject toxic dyes into the skin...my friends know this is how I feel...its the same with piercings...I have this sick ritual of getting my friends to show me their tounge piercings and then for me to go "urrgghh I can't look" whilst peeping through my hands that are covering my eyes...we just laugh... :)

so sorry truly I didn't mean to offend...

Thank you for saying so,

but I'm not offended... maybe just a little tense - end of the semester is just around the corner! *gasp* And I am just a little sensitive when I feel like I am being judged, but I know you are not judging me.

I started getting tattooed very young, maybe about 15. It's a been a long time, and I've gone back and forth about whether to add to my collection, but I know I will at some point - if only for a little repair work. And I have no problems, either, admitting to my own personal insane behavior, I just never really considered getting tattooed as part of that. I even sometimes forget about it, until I get in the shower. :) I'm kinda shy about it, anyway. Maybe not shy about being colorful, but I'm not always comfortable with the attention I get when I show it off. It's never really been negative, just overwhelming. Everyone thinks they need to talk to you about it, for some reason.

Piercings are another story. I've had exactly two body piercings, and both came out within a week. My body completely rejected the idea, which is fine by me.

Anyhow, thanks for your response. I appreciate the clarification.

Mutilating any part of the

Mutilating any part of the body is not something I would ever do. Yet, I believe people can choose what to do with their bodies. Their children bodies are not theirs, so, this choice should be left for the adult male to decide.Because of that I consider baby circumcision a crime just like female circumcision too.
I personally love having intercourse with intact man much much better. It feels much nicer. Without foreskin it feels like a guy is wearing a condom, even when he is not.
I read book about it, and it said, that men who did it as adults are regreting it so badly, because their pleasure is reduced a lot without sensitive foreskin. By the way some men are actually getting them back through operation or through stretching.

My understanding of skin

My understanding of skin stretching generally is that cells are added over time. It's one thing to add skin cells, but an entirely different thing to add nerve tissue. The site talks about nerve elongation. That won't replace the removed nerve tissue. The root nerves are still intact I guess so perhaps it doesn't matter for some sensitivity, but some is gone.

I personally don't understand the amount of debate about this. Despite generally being a naturalist, it has never bothered me that I'm circumcised. I accept that I might be brainwashed. Unless one is circumcised as an adult, I don't see how one can really comment on the topic from personally data. I'm not convinced there is much trauma to a newborn or nearly newborn. Birth itself is seems more traumatic. Perhaps I need to read up.

Isn't part of the argument for restoration that it is easier for the male to orgasm? Doesn't that seem contrary to the ideas here? I guess the greater glans sensitivity would be positive, but both partners would have to work harder to avoid orgasm.

Yes, I agree it may be

Yes, I agree it may be harder to avoid orgasm... Bad

But may also protect glans from unwanted stimulation... Good

I have been trying for last few days and see some results already. but may take 1 year for success.

Well if much is in the mind

Well if much is in the mind anyway, both points might be moot. I did read more about this, but remain unsure where I come down on the issue. It seems one would have to be particularly motivated to restore. There are risks in the sense that the outcome isn't known. In my case, I have no interest now as I might as well wait at this point so I have a real sexual basis for comparison if I choose to try this down the road. I guess one could try one of the covering options to see how one feels with greater sensitivity. That can get tricky as it won't be too pleasant to go back.

Having Body Parts

Can lead to Issues

If it weren't for people wanting to hang onto their Lungs, Breasts, and Prostates, we could cut out the most common deaths due to cancer!


That was quick. It does seem

That was quick. It does seem to require serious dedication. I recall that site or maybe it was the The Joy of Uncircumcising book saying only about 10% of circumcised men really care that they were circumcised. They also speak of emotional trauma caused by the process. I wonder if that can be addressed by healthier sexuality without the need for recreating what is gone. I also wonder if too much emphasis is being placed on the glans and foreskin when there is a lot more penis to be sensitive. Mind awareness might return more sensitivity than foreskin restoration. This seems just a tad like the male chastity crowd. They are well intended but perhaps are gong about it in a less than direct way.

The taping seems much too much work and the risk of tearing doesn't sound fun. The devices make more sense to me if I were to do this. Picking a device is another story all together. I like the hand stretching option too, but the book says only a few people are known to have done that successfully. I like a more natural challenge.

10% of circumcised men

I've never read that book so am unsure of whether it relates to those circumcised at birth or late in life. If the former, then it's hard for anyone to really be objective as they have never experienced both sides, also in many circumstances it is due to religious beliefs and there are not many people that criticise their own religion.

More importantly for this topic i suppose is that i was circumcised late in life (mid twenties), i discussed this with the urologist and the general concensus (amongst his peers) appeared to be that circumcision is not advisable unless necessary. One important point that was made was that by design the foreskin helps keep the womans lubrication where it is needed most.

Just my two cents worth.

I don't recall a discussion

I don't recall a discussion of circumcision from a female perspective, but I only skimmed the book. That would be an interesting angle.

A possible flip side is that circumcision might require more lubrication which in turn requires more female engagement (until lube came along). Circumcision might ultimately be a boon to the female.

I agree 100% mind

I agree 100% mind sensitivity is more important than penis sensitivity

It is pretty neat to watch the glans soften up... "ohhh, that's how it supposed to work!"

regarding circumcision

it was a long time ago, but if you can find it, google "origins of ritual circumcision" or maybe "origins of jewish circumcision" by R.D. Gray or Grey. it was long but very interesting.