Welcome to PlagueFest.com! Log in or Sign up to interact with the Plague Fest community.
  1. Welcome Guest! to interact with the community and gain access to all the site's features.

A simple circumscision gone wrong.

Discussion in Everything & Anything started by ck27, Sep 25, 2008

  1. Dec 30, 2006
    Link below:


    Major lol. Well not for the guy.
  2. Feb 21, 2007
    lol? someone forgot to inform him of the risks!!
  3. Jul 16, 2008
    damn sucks to be him
  4. Jun 4, 2006
    man he's not gonna be using that thing anyway, who cares.
  5. Mar 16, 2008
    sucks for Paula now :S
  6. May 24, 2008
    Thank god I never actually needed to get a circumscision...
  7. Jan 7, 2008
    Most guys don't even realize they were circumcised at birth. I mean...If your penis is the only one you've ever seen...then how do you know? MOST guys don't go around examining other guys' penises...at east as far as I know. (this thread is going to go to hell now)

    I'm not sure(might wanna ask Ret), but isn't circumcision at birth normal practice these days(unless otherwise requested by the parents)?
  8. May 27, 2008
    It is. I think doctors ask if the parents want them to circumcise the newborn.
  9. Dec 30, 2006
    well i was reading circumcision is becoming less and less popular because it is more healthy i thought to have a uncircumcised penis. Maybe it is the other way around i dont remember. I dont think ill be looking into it either.

    That would be a nice surprise at the doctors.

    Wake up
    "OMG wheres my penis!"
  10. May 27, 2008
    *doctor is wiggling it around in his hand*
  11. Feb 21, 2007
    well, I have seen other guy's penis'...lol.....but ya, circumcision is the standard these days. 2 things tho: even tho most everyone gets a circumcision, it is still asurgical procedure, and the parent must sign consent for it (meaning they can refuse, and the kid remains uncircumcised), and 2. this guy was born a long long time ago (IMO before much of real medicine was around) and thus, it maybe wasn't as standard practice back then.

    And ck, the jury is still out on that one. I mean, for the better part of at least the last 20-30 yrs, the standard thought has been that cirumcision is healthier/better...but there is some research which says this may not be true. IMO, I just think remaining uncircumcised poses more risk for infection underneath the foreskin. If you think about the area, it can remain fairly wet after urination or sex, with the latter containing tons of bacteria. So I would think that would just set up more of a risk for infection. Not sure if there is research proving this, but thats just my logical reasoning.
  12. Mar 12, 2008
    at least it didn't hurt :grin:

    i think the circumscision is a lot more safer because its less of a mess after sex and whatnot.
    plus it looks like a saggy hotdog if it isn't. amirite?

    so... my 2 cents.