# Uncircumcised as a deal breaker?



## Etomidate (Mar 10, 2018)

My wife and I have been married for 10 years, together for 15. Last night the topic of circumcision came up because a couple we are close to invited us to their son’s bris. I’m uncircumcised and this is the only time in our relationship we’ve ever discussed the topic other than when we had our son (this isn’t a discussion about infant circumcision so no one here is going to know what we decided). Anyways, she said that when we got together she was surprised I wasn’t circumcised - I was born in Belgium and it’s not very common there. When I asked if she has a preference she admitted that when we got together she preferred circumcised and that mine took time to get used to. I understand this because in the US women are much more accustomed to circumcised versus uncircumcised, so it didn’t bother me. She went onto say that although it was a preference it was not anywhere near a deal breaker and now she’s used to it and wouldn’t want me to change and that if we were to ever divorce a circumcised penis would be strange for her now.

This got me wondering. How many women actually have a preference for circumcised penises? And if so, is it a deal breaker for you if a guy is not?


----------



## I shouldnthave (Apr 11, 2018)

I would say before I had ever had an uncircumcised boy friend, that circumcised was my preference.

After experiencing both - while circumcised may still be my aesethic preference - seems like penises are probably best off as nature intended rather than surgically modifing them.

I have also seen some men who had obvious scars and disfigurement due to the proceedure.

For me? Uncircumcised while never be a deal breaker.


----------



## KM87 (Nov 5, 2017)

Not a deal breaker at all. My husband is the first/only uncircumcised penis I've encountered. When we were first intimate, i was maybe slightly surprised, but that passed quickly. The only time i gave it a second thought was when our son was born and we had to make that decision with him.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Not a deal breaker. How it looks/feels when erect may be a deal breaker. Being uncut doesn’t seem to affect the erect state in my experience. I do admit that being American I have not experienced that many uncut men. But when I have it wasn’t an issue and I was curious about their foreskin, being a novelty to me.


----------



## Livvie (Jan 20, 2014)

Ex husband was not circumcised. My sons are not circumcised.

Not a deal breaker! It's how a penis is made!


----------



## ButWeAreStrange (Feb 2, 2018)

I'm American but come from a European background (none of the men in my family were ever circumcised) and so I never really understood the difference until I entered the dating world. It isn't a deal breaker at all to me, doesn't feel any different, the visual difference isn't an issue. I am fascinated by the politics and history of circumcision in the states since it's primarily trend-based and supposedly on the decline now. 

My husband is but his mother admitted to me that the only reason he is circumcised is because she wanted him to "look like his Dad." No other reason, so we discussed at the time if we ever had a son, we decided that making a permanent/body altering decision for him before he could have a say in the matter (let alone one purely based on an aesthetic that doesn't concern us in any way) wouldn't be appropriate for us. We're all for body alterations/modifications if there is a medical need or if the individual chooses it on their own, and so we wanted to give him that option and not make the decision for him. 

I don't tend to watch heterosexual porn, but the few times I have I did find it interesting that pretty much every man appeared circumcised. I'm not sure if that's a typical thing across the board, but it could also explain why American women are more prepared for cut rather than uncut. In sex education (with little was offered in school) anytime we were shown a diagram, the penis was always circumcised, too, so there might be a distinct cultural preconceived notion simply based on what we're exposed to as "the norm." I remember even asking a teacher in sex ed at one point what the difference was since the diagram seemed off to me and she told me there was absolutely no difference and that it was a "****ty" question to ask. American sexual education is extremely lacking both in content as well as approach.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

My GF says yes and yes

She apparently had a bad experience with one, the details of which I am not privy to


----------



## Bluesclues (Mar 30, 2016)

Wolf1974 said:


> My GF says yes and yes
> 
> She apparently had a bad experience with one, the details of which I am not privy to


I had a bad experience with one too, but it was because the guy was a complete ****, nothing to do with his foreskin!

His was the first and only uncut penis I have seen in person. It took my aback at first but certainly wasn’t a dealbreaker. 

Honestly, growing up I would hear guys make jokes about “**** cheese” and so yeah, the cleanliness aspect did plant some preconceived negative thoughts about it in my head.


----------



## Knips (May 23, 2017)

Hello, I am glad i am not circumsized. There are a lot nerve endings at the foreskin. Taking that away would take away a part of the pleasure and feeling. As for the hygiene aspect. A penis needs to be cleaned reguraly, circumsized or not.


----------



## frusdil (Sep 5, 2013)

It wouldn't bother me either way. My dad was circumcised, neither of my brothers are. My husband is but wishes he wasn't. If we had a son, he wouldn't be done except for medical reasons.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

I'll preface my opinion by saying that I have never had sex with an uncircumcised man and the only uncircumcised penises I have seen have been in porn or artwork. Having said that, I would not consider it a dealbreaker for penetrative sex but would for oral sex. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

When the penis is fully erect, I don't see any difference between a cut and uncut penis: the head seems always fully exposed. It's only when it's not erect where the head is covered on an uncut penis. At least that's the case with me. So I don't see what the deal is and why anyone cares.
Coming from jewish background, I am glad I wasn't 'butchered' as a child.
If you shower daily (and get a daily BJ, for extra polish factor  ) there's never any problem at all. I think it's when people had to go through deserts for 40 days+ with no showers or BJs when the hygiene may have been an issue.


----------



## Etomidate (Mar 10, 2018)

Bluesclues said:


> Honestly, growing up I would hear guys make jokes about “**** cheese” and so yeah, the cleanliness aspect did plant some preconceived negative thoughts about it in my head.


I never understood why some uncircumcised guys don't keep themselves clean. It's not like it takes much longer than washing any other body part, there's just one extra step involved, takes maybe 30 seconds longer.


----------



## Etomidate (Mar 10, 2018)

Lila said:


> Having said that, I would not consider it a dealbreaker for penetrative sex but would for oral sex.


Feel free not to answer if you don't want to, but I am curious as to why it would be a deal breaker for oral, especially if the guy has good hygiene? Hypothetically, if you were to marry a guy who is uncircumcised, you would never give him oral? Not blasting you, just curious as to why it's a not a deal breaker for intercourse but it is for oral.


----------



## Livvie (Jan 20, 2014)

Etomidate said:


> Lila said:
> 
> 
> > Having said that, I would not consider it a dealbreaker for penetrative sex but would for oral sex.
> ...


I'm curious, too. When erect it's not much different than a circumsized one and if the guy has good hygiene, no difference there.

Sorry if too much-- I've been near circumcised penis and balls that are more stinky than uncircumcised guy because the guy was lazy about washing--yes a circumcised one can taste like a urinal if the guy is lazy about washing-- and peeing.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Livvie said:


> I'm curious, too. When erect it's not much different than a circumsized one and if the guy has good hygiene, no difference there.
> 
> Sorry if too much-- I've been near circumcised penis and balls that are more stinky than uncircumcised guy because the guy was lazy about washing--yes a circumcised one can taste like a urinal if the guy is lazy about washing-- and peeing.


I just puked a little bit in my mouth reading this...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Lila said:


> I'll preface my opinion by saying that I have never had sex with an uncircumcised man and the only uncircumcised penises I have seen have been in porn or artwork. Having said that, I would not consider it a dealbreaker for penetrative sex but would for oral sex.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


When erect, an uncut one isn’t any different than a cut one. So for oral sex, it’s not like the foreskin is even evident. It becomes tight against the shaft.

Not trying to change your mind but was just sharing for education on the topic. I’ve been with only one uncut man sexually and when erect there was no discernible difference between him and a cut man for intercourse or oral.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Etomidate said:


> Feel free not to answer if you don't want to, but I am curious as to why it would be a deal breaker for oral, especially if the guy has good hygiene? Hypothetically, if you were to marry a guy who is uncircumcised, you would never give him oral? Not blasting you, just curious as to why it's a not a deal breaker for intercourse but it is for oral.


For me, assuming hygiene is good, it's about aesthetics. With oral sex, the penis is front and center. It's literally in your face. With penetrative sex, you don't see it so much as feel it. It's a different experience.

And I can't answer your hypothetical question because it would never happen. I don't think a man would agree to marry a woman who won't perform oral sex. 

I will never say never but it would take a lot for me to overcome that kind of aversion. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Livvie said:


> I'm curious, too. When erect it's not much different than a circumsized one and if the guy has good hygiene, no difference there.
> 
> Sorry if too much-- I've been near circumcised penis and balls that are more stinky than uncircumcised guy because the guy was lazy about washing--yes a circumcised one can taste like a urinal if the guy is lazy about washing-- and peeing.


 @Livvie you made me lol. Thankfully I've never had an issue with stinky penises. Knock on wood, they've all been healthy and clean. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Faithful Wife said:


> When erect, an uncut one isn’t any different than a cut one. So for oral sex, it’s not like the foreskin is even evident. It becomes tight against the shaft.
> 
> Not trying to change your mind but was just sharing for education on the topic. I’ve been with only one uncut man sexually and when erect there was no discernible difference between him and a cut man for intercourse or oral.


Some uncircumcised penises have foreskin that becomes tight on the shaft. Others don't. From what I've seen and learned, thd foreskin is varied and unique. It can be short and tighter, long and looser, and it can completely or partially retract from the head. 

For me it's about the aesthetic appeal. I prefer the look of the circumcised penis. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Lila said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> > When erect, an uncut one isn’t any different than a cut one. So for oral sex, it’s not like the foreskin is even evident. It becomes tight against the shaft.
> ...


I prefer the look of uncut as well. Especially when not erect (obviously). 

I’ve just never seen an uncut one that didn’t look the same as a cut one when erect. I’ll take your word for it that some look different. Live and learn!


----------



## VeryHurt (Mar 11, 2011)

It would be a deal breaker for me ..... just sayin !!


----------



## Knips (May 23, 2017)

So if you met the man of you're life. Nice handsome intelligent and funny man that threats you like a princess. The " one out of a million" man. Would you really break up for a little bit skin too much? After all, when the penis is erect you almost can't see the difference.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Knips said:


> So if you met the man of you're life. Nice handsome intelligent and funny man that threats you like a princess. The " one out of a million" man. Would you really break up for a little bit skin too much? After all, when the penis is erect you almost can't see the difference.


Some women would.

Some men would also forego a woman if he found out she had say, boobs that were really unattractive to him, or an ass that made him shudder.

Feeling physically attracted to a partner is really important for some people. The issue of foreskin wouldn’t be a deal breaker for me, but a small penis would. A small penis would be both a visual and a physical turn off for me. Small = what I consider small, not what anyone else thinks.

Small biceps would be a deal breaker for me too and would be noticed long before any indication of his penis size would be. I don’t think I could even go on one date with a man who had no biceps. They don’t have to be huge but they have to exist.

If a man rejected me for any physical attribute I would not be offended in the least. Better to follow your own baseline attraction, I would never want to feel someone had to ignore some part of my body in order to have sex with me.

A friend of mine was with a guy who had a great physique except that he had a beer gut. Awesome thick arms, incredible biceps (like Mr. Incredible, actually), amazing legs, great ass...but literally in order to have sex with him she had to avert her eyes and never think about his gut or she couldn’t go through with it. When she told me that I just felt like, how is that worth it? If he knew she was repulsed by his body would he feel it was worth it? She loved him and was trying to make it work. I understood but couldn’t relate. They broke up for other reasons and now it is a deal breaker to her that a man has a gut.


----------



## grays (Jun 24, 2014)

Etomidate said:


> I never understood why some uncircumcised guys don't keep themselves clean. It's not like it takes much longer than washing any other body part, there's just one extra step involved, takes maybe 30 seconds longer.


I'm not even sure there are uncirced guys who don't keep themselves clean. My ex-h wasn't circed and wasn't all that hygienic when I met him. He was 21 and played sports and ran long distance and didn't seem to get that daily bathing was absolutely mandatory. But even in the early days before I had really trained him, his **** was always, always clean and fresh smelling when we had sex. Since my divorce I've been with several other uncirced men and have never run into any sort of head cheese problem. Maybe there are guys here and there who don't keep clean but I feel like if that's their style, there's likely to be an ick factor circed or not. And, I've always thought that the way women are built is more suspect than uncirced man in terms of what can accumulate between showers or get missed while showering.

At any rate, I prefer an uncirced penis but nothing's a deal breaker. I mostly prefer it for his sake. The only negative for me with an circed penis is I have no idea how to touch them with my hand. If there's a foreskin, I'm good, but if there's no foreskin and the skin is tight, I just feel like I'm gonna hurt him unless I'm spitting all over my hand or have a bottle of lube right there.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Faithful Wife said:


> I prefer the look of uncut as well. Especially when not erect (obviously).
> 
> I’ve just never seen an uncut one that didn’t look the same as a cut one when erect. I’ll take your word for it that some look different. Live and learn!


I would have never known either but about a year ago I read about a non profit website that catalogued photos of "real" penises. Men donate their photos to the organization along with their stats. I think it is similar to the petal project (women's labia) where the photos are used to show the amazing variety of penises. Anyway, I looked and boy was there ever a kaleidescope, lol. 

I have looked everywhere for that link and can't find it. If I remember the name of the organization I'll post. It's really fascinating. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## hairyhead (Oct 30, 2015)

Why on earth would anyone want to butcher the genitalia of a baby. Barbaric if you ask me.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk


----------



## Knips (May 23, 2017)

You should know that with an circumsized penis the glans develops a harder skin. This happens because the glans is unprotected and with the friction over the years. This means the glans is less sensitive.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

There are more things to be concerned with when finding a made than whether or not their penis is circumcised or not.

My only issue with non-circumsized is hygine. In the past it's been a problem and some guys just don't care if you ask them to please clean themselves before sex. Just gross.

Some poeple say that circumsicion decreases sensetivity in the penus. Btu I've never noticed this wiht any circumsized guy i've been with. Both circumsized adn not seemed to do just fine adn get a lot out of sex. I don't think that a guy can attest to the difference unless he has exprienced sex in both states as an adult. Otherwise they would have no basis of comparison.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Risk of Infection

Going along with the cleanliness factor, when a guy is uncircumcised, moisture can get trapped between his penis and his foreskin, creating the ideal environment for bacteria to incubate. "Female sex partners of uncircumcised men are at increased risk of bacterial vaginosis," says Mehta. Guys who aren't circumcised may also be more likely to pass along any infections they have, including yeast infections, UTIs, and STDs (particularly HPV and HIV).

https://www.shape.com/lifestyle/sex-and-love/sex-circumcised-man-different


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Well here you go... some studies on the topic of whether or not circumcision reduces sexual pleasure for the man. Apparently it does not....

The Two Best Studies

The researchers scoured the world medical/sexuality literature and found 36 methodologically good-to-rigorous studies examining the impact of circumcision on men’s sexuality. The two best reports met the gold standard of research, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials, both in southern Africa, where circumcision has become an extremely cost-effective approach to controlling AIDS.

• Researchers in Kenya surveyed the sexual function, pleasure, and satisfaction of 2,784 uncircumcised sexually active adult men. Then they circumcised 1,391 of them, and re-surveyed the entire group every six months for two years. In every survey, the two groups showed no statistically significant differences in sexual function, pleasure, or satisfaction. 

The researchers also asked the circumcised men additional questions focusing on any differences they noticed before and after the procedure. At the two-year mark, 99.9 percent of the men said they felt “satisfied with their circumcisions,” and far from decreasing penile sensitivity, 72 percent said their sensitivity had increased. In addition, 78 percent said circumcision made it easier to don condoms.

• Researchers in Uganda conducted a similar trial involving 4,456 uncircumcised adult men, 2,210 of whom got circumcised. Before-and-after surveys showed no differences in sexual desire, erection issues, or other measures of sexual function, pleasure, and satisfaction. Two years after the procedure, 99.9 percent of the uncircumcised men said they felt “satisfied or very satisfied” with their sex lives, while among those who’d been circumcised, the figure was a statistically equivalent 98.4 percent.

The other 34 studies showed similar results. In several, compared with men with intact foreskins, those who’d been circumcised often said their penises felt more erotically sensitive. In addition, circumcision had no effect on rates of premature ejaculation or erection or ejaculation difficulties.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...-circumcision-reduce-men-s-sexual-sensitivity


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

hairyhead said:


> Why on earth would anyone want to butcher the genitalia of a baby. Barbaric if you ask me.


Male circumcision was originally done in ancient times for two reasons:
1) With low ability for hygiene in ancient times, it was healthier for both the male and female. Both got fewer infections after circumcision.
2) It has been part of the right of passage to adult hood in many cultures. The Aramaic religions elevated it to a religious right of passage.​
And don't forget that much of Africa and the Middle East also perform female genital mutilation (FGM) on young girls that is far more extensive and in it's extreme removes all external sexual flesh to ensure that women cannot enjoy sex. It's seen as a way to make sure that women are kept under control.


----------



## Etomidate (Mar 10, 2018)

hairyhead said:


> Why on earth would anyone want to butcher the genitalia of a baby. Barbaric if you ask me.
> 
> Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk


Sorry, this isn’t a thread to debate the merrits, or lack there of, if infant circumcision. If that’s what you want to do, start your own thread and STAY OFF THOS ONE. Understood?


----------



## hairyhead (Oct 30, 2015)

Etomidate said:


> Sorry, this isn’t a thread to debate the merrits, or lack there of, if infant circumcision. If that’s what you want to do, start your own thread and STAY OFF THOS ONE. Understood?


Oh dear!

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk


----------



## hairyhead (Oct 30, 2015)

EleGirl said:


> Male circumcision was originally done in ancient times for two reasons:
> 1) With low ability for hygiene in ancient times, it was healthier for both the male and female. Both got fewer infections after circumcision.
> 2) It has been part of the right of passage to adult hood in many cultures. The Aramaic religions elevated it to a religious right of passage.​
> And don't forget that much of Africa and the Middle East also perform female genital mutilation (FGM) on young girls that is far more extensive and in it's extreme removes all external sexual flesh to ensure that women cannot enjoy sex. It's seen as a way to make sure that women are kept under control.


I am aware of the hygiene and the religious links to circumcision.

For most of the developed world the hygiene issue is pretty well non existent unless the man is too lazy to wash himself properly. I have my own views on the religious aspects but probably best not to express them.

As for FGM that is a barbaric practise which is gradually being phased out in developed countries. Those carrying out the act should be imprisoned for a very long time.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk


----------



## Keke24 (Sep 2, 2016)

Etomidate said:


> I never understood why some uncircumcised guys don't keep themselves clean. It's not like it takes much longer than washing any other body part, there's just one extra step involved, takes maybe 30 seconds longer.


This is my only problem with uncircumcised penises. 

The first guy I dated in my late teens, uncircumcised. He could not pull the foreskin back, his parents never taught him to do it as a child and by the time he realized it was necessary the skin was too taut. Unprotected sex or oral with a penis in that condition, uh uh. ughh

I had one male friend who had a similar experience. Parents failed to teach him to clean his penis by pulling the foreskin back. He realized his was different when he started masturbating/watching porn. He was forced to get circumcised in his early 20s ahead of his wedding. Although he had gradually managed to pull the skin back during his teens, the remaining skin tightness made it impossible for him to enjoy unprotected sex. He said he had always needed the protection of the condom to prevent the possibility of any painful tugging on the skin from friction during sex.

So in some cases it's not laziness as much as it excessive skin tightness making proper cleaning difficult. Shame on the parents in those cases, especially the fathers. How does teaching something like that to your son slip your mind?!


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Keke24 said:


> This is my only problem with uncircumcised penises.
> 
> The first guy I dated in my late teens, uncircumcised. He could not pull the foreskin back, his parents never taught him to do it as a child and by the time he realized it was necessary the skin was too taut. Unprotected sex or oral with a penis in that condition, uh uh. ughh
> 
> ...




I don’t think it’s to do with not knowing how to pull back foreskin when you are young. Some men have a very tight foreskin and they have to have a small procedure. I had a friend who had this problem. Normally it pulls back without issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## hairyhead (Oct 30, 2015)

Most teenagers probably have enough of a fixation on their penis that they learn about the foreskin and keeping the smegma at bay.

Routine circumcision due to hygiene is unnecessary. 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

Wouldn't be dealbreaker for me. (And this discussion reminds me of the labial preferences of men.)

I'd want him clean there just like I'd want him clean everywhere else. 

I've read a little about foreskin play, so to me, it'd be just an extra thing to toy with.


----------



## Luvher4life (Jan 15, 2016)

It was a medical necessity for me to be circumcised as an infant. I am the only male in my immediate family who was circumcised. My father and three brothers are in tact. As a matter of fact, I don't know of anybody that I ever actually saw that was circumcised. It seemed everybody was in tact. It never was an issue for me, however, because all of the feedback I got was positive from the ladies.

Now, if I would've had sons instead of daughters, I would've been left with decisions to make. I likely would've went with whatever the doctors recommended, although I would've "preferred" they look like their father.

Everybody has their preferences about many things. If what I have didn't work for one woman, I'd move on to another woman who was more appreciative of it. They're all different, too. No big deal either way.


----------

