Read comments for:

Mominatrix

A Woody With a Hoody Feels Very Goody

By Kristen Chase

interesting post.

heres some research that was done to further prove your point...


http://www.livescience.com/health/070615_penis_sensitivity.html


i would never suggest someone be dissatisfied with their husband's circumcision status.


but i strongly advice people to think twice before subjecting the needless procedure on their kids.

Posted by: Joel | Aug 03, 2007 07:23

I have had that pleasure, right here in the good ol' USA. And out of respect for my husband, that's all I'll say about that.

Posted by: mothergoosemouse | Aug 03, 2007 10:58

While I own three vibrators, I can't say I've ever seen an uncircumcised penis.

Not ever.

And as for the decision to circumcise our son, I left that up to my husband.

What a very informative post!

Posted by: Dana | Aug 03, 2007 11:45

met 1 with (and married him!) and 4 without: definitely prefer the hoody! More enjoyable for so many reasons...

Posted by: Erika | Aug 04, 2007 04:21

I am an intact male and am happy not to have been cut at birth
My wife seems to like that too

Posted by: Jim | Aug 04, 2007 08:47

I love this blog!!!
I've had the "pleasure" of knowing both cut & uncut men. My hubby is cut and sex is great but I wish he still had a foreskin. We have one son & I left him intact (uncircumcised). I'm a nurse & I've seen circumcisions. There was no way I was doing that to my child. Hubby doesn't seem to mind that Jr. looks different from him and Jr. has never noticed.
Thanks for writing about this. It's such a taboo topic here in the US and so many people think uncircumcised guys are "unnatural" or "dirty". The opposite is true. Thanks!

Posted by: Andi | Aug 04, 2007 21:24

I've seen both but only "known" the au natural version. I think it's much cuter looking and I've no complaints in the bedroom either.
As for my son, our decision was simple -- my 3rd+ gen American family didn't do it when it was "in" and my husband's French immigrant family certainly didn't do it ever.
Plus, why cut off a perfectly good part of someone's body without their consent? Seems a little crazy to me....

Posted by: VDog | Aug 04, 2007 21:47

Oh, and I'm under 30, with a mid-thirties husband. But perhaps my experience is unique....

Posted by: VDog | Aug 04, 2007 21:49

We left our son intact because I just couldn't do that to him (I mean, OUCH!) and because everything I read on the subject seemed to conclude that there is very little reason to do it apart from “aesthetics”. It’s good to hear more positive reasons to avoid the knife.

Posted by: heathersway | Aug 05, 2007 12:56

good to hear about the way us North Americans are smartening up about this procedure with the amount of information we have on the topic in this day and age.


i don't blame anyone for doing this procedure to their sons if they didn't know any better, but their is no excuse to not research a procedure like this, and just do it for a dumb reason like how it looks.

Posted by: joel | Aug 06, 2007 05:10

I'd comment further on how wonderful this post is, but I'm a little flabbergasted to learn that Dana owns THREE vibrators!

Posted by: Liz | Aug 07, 2007 09:33

Yikes. I can't believe this is yet another area where science is losing out to the extremes of PC, new age-ism, or religious conservatism.

First, the statement about AIDS is NOT true...see this link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3570223.stm

It has nothing to do w/ cleanliness. Un cut is more dangerous, period. And remember, a condom can break, even if your son is being careful someday & using one. Don't you want the extra piece of mind?

Second, gimme a break with the pain. Babies will not remember it any more than the hundreds of times they fall down or get hurt learning to crawl, or the times they cry because of gas or hunger. They use a topical anesthetic, & my son didn't even cry during his circumcision, so they went ahead & gave him his first shot for Hepatitis. He didn't cry for that, either.

Finally, find me a man who remembers the "pain & horror" of his circumcision as an infant.

Please don't ignore the science, like those people avoiding vaccines.

Posted by: Toby | Aug 08, 2007 13:48

Great post! For me, it is about choice. I want my son to decide which he'd rather be---circ or uncirc--when he is old enough to understand the difference. Once he's cut, there is no going back.

Maybe men wouldn't need so much Viagra and there wouldn't be so much 'erectile disfunction' if there were more intact penises?

Posted by: Fairly Odd Mother | Aug 10, 2007 09:00

Great posting!

Of course, the issue of infant circumcision has nothing at all to do with HIV, or when there will be an AIDS vaccine, or anything STD related, because INFANTS DON'T HAVE SEX!!

HIS body, HIS decision.

A cut man can decide to restore some of his lost sensitivity. Google "Foreskin Cone." It's easy and comfortable to grow as much as an inch of new skin per year, or just wear the remaining shaft skin forward like a foreskin.

Posted by: RonLow | Aug 19, 2007 12:34

I really enjoyed your comments about having a 'Hoody.'
I'm intact and wouldn't have it any other way.
My girlfriend is latin and she has found so many ways to kiss,suck,and play play with my foreskin, that I find it hard to leave our bed and go to work.
All men should have sex the way Nature intended - with a foreskin.

Posted by: LW | Jan 08, 2008 23:42

Well you had fun writing that! I would agree with one point you made- basicallly that a hand job with an elephant trunk guy is easier , quicker, requires virtually no skill!

Other than that there is no disadvantage to a guy that can be blamed on a circumcision. The removal of the excess skin removes that skin from its insulating effect and opens the way for much better direct stimulation to the coronal ridge and the underside.
It is cleaner.
It is sexier to the eye.
It doesn't carry unneeded extra flavors.

Posted by: Hal | Jan 27, 2008 15:05

Leave a comment: