Left Behinds

The anti-andrewsullivan.com. Or, the Robin Hood (Maid Marian?) of bright pink Blogger blogs.

Monday, February 13, 2006

To Snip Or Not To Snip

In response to this article about circumcision in Slate, I wrote the following letter to Slate. The writer just emailed me asking if she could use my letter in her followup, but I think its more natural home is here on Left Behinds.

I'm part of the tiny minority of half-cut guys. I guess the doctor at Yale New Haven Hospital was in a rush or looked away for a moment or something.

Anyhow, I can definitely, definitely attest to the fact that most of my sexual sensitivity is on the left (uncut) part of my penis. The right side feels OK, but it's pretty much incomparable. It's not just that my left side has more sensation -- it has a different kind of sensation.

I recently learned that an acquaintance of mine is also half cut, and he completely agreed with me. Both of us are happy as we are, with the best of both worlds, but I am very grateful to the incompetence of my doctor for leaving me at least some of my foreskin. When women describe the overwhelming power of their orgasms I suspect it's similar to what goes on with the uncut side of my penis, and much less similar to the less intense, more mechanical pleasure I can feel on my right side.

But then again, controlling men's sexual aggression is a losing battle anyhow, so maybe snipping is good social policy. Imagine your average lothario with a hundred times more motivation to pursue sex. Pretty scary.

Tags:,,, , , ,


  • At 11:53 PM, Anonymous zapfo said…

    come on!, who has a casual conversation man to man about being cut, or half-cut for that matter? Perhaps a college conversation, who knows. What I know from the gay lifestyle, in regards to having a penis and having sex with males that may or may not be cut, I find the benefit factor or sensitivity issue to be a person to person opinion and less to do with extra foreskin instead more with one's own penis type (NOT ALL CUT/UNCUT PENISES ARE THE SAME). Maybe women or even men think that all people of their gender have the same shape, density, skin texture, etc in regards to their body parts.

    I am cut, and although wouldn't mind being uncut, have found many detriments in regards to sensitivity of those male partners that are cut. Some almost abhor moving on from foreplay and on to sexual play because they are "overly sensitive" and this detracts from the amazing experience of building gradually to an orgasm for both partners. Yes, one can think your male sexuality is "hindered" or "controlled" in regard to being cut, but I think it's absurd to take the opinion of a half-cut person given that they aren't one or the other, and might be experiencing an "uncut" experience and just ignoring or too overwhelmed to notice their cut experience.

    It might be well and good to discuss this and share opinions, but don't forget that people enjoy their cut selves too.

    Think about it if we were all uncut anyway or didn't socially cut ourselves at birth: all men would have this extra inch of flap on their extensions of themselves and with the modern world of tatoos, piercings and body grooming, eventually you would still come to a point in culture where people would groom that extra skin off for the sake of doing it.

    Sensitivity to sexual intercourse is a highly mental situation for both men and women and to add to the mentality that men are desensitized for missing skin, is to ignore that people are left out of the sexual enjoyment process as lovers and partners because one of the participants has to be concerned with who is cut and uncut, which is better, etc. This is like the size/matter situation. Size matters only when you think it matters, same thing with foreskin.

  • At 1:02 AM, Blogger Solomon Grundy said…

    Hey, I didn't mean to suggest that cut guys can't enjoy sex. All I'm talking about is my own experience. I do think that my experience is unique enough that I and my other half cut friend Andre are like living experiments. Our results suggest that there is a lot more sensitivity on the uncut side, and that it's a different type of sensitivity. This is consistent with the scientific fact that there are clusters of nerves on the underside of foreskin.

    I have also had to deal sexually with uncut guys who were excessively sensitive, and yes it's a drag. I'm not placing a value judgement on being more sexually sensitive, I'm just saying that it's a fact.

    And I'm not like a passionate opponent of circumcison or anything, for the reason that I already said: male sexuality is already too prominent in most cultures, so in my opinion anything that dampens male libidos is probably a good thing for society as a whole.

    As I write that, I realize that it's probably the justification of female circumcision (or genital mutilation), which I of course disagree with (for one thing male orgasms are just reduced by circumcision, not eliminated). So yes, I selfishly wish I were totally uncut, because I like sexual pleasure, but I also think most guys should be cut, because male sexual aggression is the root cause of a lot of fucked up shit in the world. Ha I realize that is completely contradictory but whatever.

    My MAIN point is that cut guys seriously do not know what they're missing, and uncut guys don't realize how much more intense their experience is. Only Andre and I (and maybe guys who get late-life circumcisions) know both sides, so take our word for it. ;)

  • At 1:20 AM, Anonymous zapfo said…


    Not to rehash what has been already been discussed back and forth, I would like to point out my view that I think sex is more than what you might agree is the restrictive view that there are two exclusively important items for sex, the penis, and the vagina.

    Even for heterosexual couples, sex is much more than the interaction of those organs, and although I have a lot curious musings of what it must be like to be uncut, and for many regards think it is more natural to be uncut, I find the discussion can go beyond the all important inch of skin to a world of wonderful topics that add depth and breadth of the sexual experience for men and women such as: what role does a prostate play (sorry for injecting my own personal intrigue), erogenous zones and their importance along with foreplay, and not to mention mindsets during sex, outside of the rabid uncut sex we all crave (ravenous, raw, unbridled).

    I find myself personally, gender mutilated, in regards to the removal of a healthy but undescended testicle that I have extensively worked to assure myself and fill myself up with confidence and assertive identity-measures to avoid focusing on "what I do/don't have". That is something I think those who are "with/without" might find some mutilation debate over and the implications a doctor/society has in deciding the appropriate measures for gender modification on a whim that "eh this is faster than finding a way to descend it, take care of the health of the organ".

    Sorry for the extra post, this is faster and convenient than firing off an email. GREAT BLOG BTW! Kudos.

  • At 1:40 AM, Blogger Solomon Grundy said…

    Ah, thanks for the compliment, and sorry to hear about your bad doctors.

    I think we're basically in agreement. I of course don't think sex is solely about stimulating the head of the guy's penis, or I would be the WORST LOVER EVER. I was really making just a very limited point, and only shared it because I think it's one of those questions a lot of guys might wonder about but assume there could never be an answer to.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com