LIttle man in the boat...directions for use.
LEESPAM2
I already knew what the joke's catch was, but thanks for the interesting
reference.
========================
LeEsPaM2 -- South Park Fan
------------------------------------------------
"Vas deferans?"
"Mmmph mmphp mmph mmp mm mmph."
"Oh."
------------------------------------------------
PERSONAL QUOTE: "OH, nooooo!!!"
Jedi
Wow, SP and sex Ed all in one newsgroup! What more could a guy need/want!
:-)
I knew about the "stimulation" part myself, but the "Little man in the boat"
reference had gone completely over my head when I first saw the episode,
though it was plain to see it had SOMETHING to do with this just from
watching the joke. Thanx for the very interesting info.
-Jedi (I just love public service announcements like this)
David J. Ulmer
Sonya wrote in message ...
snip
The only way a woman can orgasm is through clitoral stimulation of one
kind or another.
snip
Sonya, I guess you never heard of the g-spot. Its that rough area on the
top just inside the vagina. Takes a bit more practice to learn to use it
properly but they say once you learn to use it you'll never go back to the
man in the boat..
Dave...
Dreamweasel
Sonya <bitb...@wolfenet.com> wrote:
{snip}
Thanks for taking the trouble to post this in detail. Now if we could only get this in
the FAQ the question might eventually become flaccid-- er, subside. :)
> The clit is the fleshy, hooded little thingie above the labia. Be gentle!
> Suck on it (imagine it's a miniature penis, but very, very sensitive)
I'm sure the gynecology lesson will be appreciated - particularly since most guys rarely
(if ever) hear this explained in detail. But I don't know how many will find the
prospect of "sucking on a miniature penis" particularly appealing...
Dw
--
To respond, please remove "NOSPAM" from e-mail address
james smith
Sonya wrote:
>
> Ok, kids; it's an old, old reference. I have a "naughty" blues CD with
> music from the 30s which has a song by the same name.
>
> It refers to the clitoris, for those who didn't know (which apparently is
> a LOT of people on this NG). It's not sick or perverted, as some would
> have it - trust me, boys; if you ever go down on a woman, you'd do well to
> know this one.
>
> The only way a woman can orgasm is through clitoral stimulation of one
> softly around her labia (the "lips" of the vagina). Listen, now; I'm a
> woman, I know what I'm speaking of.
>
> The clit is the fleshy, hooded little thingie above the labia. Be gentle!
> lick it, and ask her what she likes as you're doing it. Many girls are shy
> about letting you know what they like, or are not confident about the
> taste or smell of their genitals. It's rarely a problem, though - if
> either bothers you, enjoy a shower together before jumping all squeaky
> clean into bed.
>
> Above all, be gentle, responsive, and understanding. Take good care of the
> little man in the boat and you'll be well rewarded.
Are you for real!I almost shit my pants laughing while reading this post
Now they know I guess!!! :-)
KILTACKY
Mmwoah,man,that was nnnasty!
Asethotep
>Sonya, I guess you never heard of the g-spot. Its that rough area on the
>top just inside the vagina. Takes a bit more practice to learn to use it
>properly but they say once you learn to use it you'll never go back to the
>man in the boat..
>
>Dave...
>
>
I beg to differ, Dave. Statistics show that only 20% of women can acheive
g-spot orgasm without manual stimulation as well. The rest...I hate to tell
ya.....are faking.
And Sonya, not all women like to be sucked. For those of us who are extra
tender there, licking is preferred. But GOOD POST! YOU GO GIRL!!!
Asethotep
JS
Hmm, missed the original post there. And all I did was go back to work
from lunch. Bummer, censership in just four hours.
This, however, sounds like a summary of an ariticle I read once at a
'porn' site. Can't recall which one...
Just DON'T picture it as a little penis!!! That's a definate turn off for
'real' men out here (you know what I mean). Please rephrase that one for
future reference. I know, its an under-developed penis from the science of
things. But it IS on a woman, and it is NOT a penis. Anyone who has a penis
is NOT a woman!
Taste?
Well, so far, it tastes great, no lie. Smell?
If it reeks, stay out. Really. The vagina area should NOT smell like fish
(or any other nasty thing). It doesn't have to smell picture perfect, but
it should not stink.
And girls, you HAVE TO let us know what you want. YOU HAVE TO, or we will
NEVER know. Its that simple. F*ck shyness, tell us!
james smith <"jimsm...@earthlink.net"@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<6n24j0$g3b$2...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
Rabbit
David J. Ulmer wrote:
> Sonya wrote in message ...
> snip
>
> The only way a woman can orgasm is through clitoral stimulation of one
> kind or another.
>
> snip
>
> Sonya, I guess you never heard of the g-spot. Its that rough area on the
> top just inside the vagina. Takes a bit more practice to learn to use it
> properly but they say once you learn to use it you'll never go back to the
> man in the boat..
>
> Dave...
And where's yours, Dave?
Rabbit
(Been practising for years, thinks the G-spot is a load of malarky)
Rabbit
> ..
>
> Just DON'T picture it as a little penis!!! That's a definate turn off for
> 'real' men out here (you know what I mean). Please rephrase that one for
> future reference. I know, its an under-developed penis from the science of
> things. But it IS on a woman, and it is NOT a penis. Anyone who has a penis
> is NOT a woman!
>
>
Actually, a penis is an overgrown clitoris. All fetuses start out female (which is
why men have nipples).
Rabbit
JS
That is debatable, and thus, trivial. Fetuses don't start out female
damnit, the DNA prooves otherwise. We are a divided species. In fact, each
sperm is a male sperm or a female sperm, but we are straying into science
again, aren't we (as well as playing with trivial terminology).
It remains, that no 'real' man wants to picture any damn penis. She used
the wrong associative image for that subject. If that image doesn't disgust
you, then...well, you can be as you wish. But when teaching a man about a
womans sexuality, you don't want the same visual stimulation a woman uses.
Women need to find a desire for the penis, its a natural thought process.
But for men, forget it. Limp dick in seconds (excuse my boldness, or not).
Rabbit <rab...@hotstar.net> wrote in article
<3596EBD3...@hotstar.net>...
Mr Bean
and then there is the 5% of woman who can orgasam without any kind of stimulus
other than mental. lucky ducks.
Deacon
> Sonya wrote:
> > trust me, boys, if you ever go down on a woman, you'd do well to
> > know this one.
> >
> > The only way a woman can orgasm is through clitoral stimulation of one
> > kind or another. Start by gently nuzzling around the area, then licking
> > softly around her labia (the "lips" of the vagina). Listen, now; I'm a
> > woman, I know what I'm speaking of.
> >
> > The clit is the fleshy, hooded little thingie above the labia. Be gentle!
> > Suck on it (imagine it's a miniature penis, but very, very sensitive),
> > lick it, and ask her what she likes as you're doing it. Many girls are shy
> > about letting you know what they like, or are not confident about the
> > taste or smell of their genitals. It's rarely a problem, though - if
> > either bothers you, enjoy a shower together before jumping all squeaky
> > clean into bed.
> >
> > Above all, be gentle, responsive, and understanding. Take good care of the
> > little man in the boat and you'll be well rewarded.
In the words of Erica Jong: "Gentle Reader, it did not taste good."
Rabbit
stanley...@cyberdude.com wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jun 1998 21:32:29 -0700, bitb...@wolfenet.com (Sonya)
> wrote:
>
> >The only way a woman can orgasm is through clitoral stimulation of one
> >kind or another. Start by gently nuzzling around the area, then licking
> >softly around her labia (the "lips" of the vagina). Listen, now; I'm a
> >woman, I know what I'm speaking of.
>
> While this may be true for you, it is certainly NOT true for every
> woman. I can think of at least 3 other non-clitoral methods by which
> women can have an orgasm.
And they are ... ?
Rabbit
JS
You are either a weird man, or it wasn't a clean vagina.
Deacon <charit...@ho.me> wrote in article <359807F4...@ho.me>...
JS
Unless you have been named stanley for the hell of it (it happens), I take
it that you are a man. Do you realize how many women laugh at men who claim
anything about a woman's sexuality?
If you are not female, you just can not know these things, no matter what
you may have seen, read, heard about, or experienced. You aren't one of
'them'.
And I only know this, because women don't have a clue about a man's sexual
drives. They may think they do, but the world just isn't that simple, and
there are a whole lot of lies floating around in mainstream society.
Wham-bam-thank-you-maam is one of these gross lies, men don't really work
like that. We generally expect more then just a simple fuck, to put it
bluntly. Men desire a sexual experience to the fullest. It is just that men
are generally too egotistical, ashamed, or just plain stupid to usually
admit these things to a women.
Really though, it is each person to their own. And no formula of any kind,
is ever going to satisfy the individual.
stanley...@cyberdude.com wrote in article
<359926df...@news.mindspring.com>...
JS
That's not all they cut off in a female circumcision. Not only this, but
this activity is generally carried out in a dirty environment (like some
dudes house), performed with crude and unclean tools (like a razor blade or
small knife), and done WITHOUT any analgesic.
But take it from this societies point of view. It is horrible right?
Yeah, but men get their penis circumcized, which does not promote a
healthier life, and reduces the sexual pleasure manyfold.
Yeah, we can condemn the female mutilation, but what about us men!?
To hell with some invisible god and man's stupid book (aka the bible), to
quote a famous man...'stay off my dick!'
Mike Cohen <spam...@nowhere.edu> wrote in article
<B1BF00F2...@0.0.0.0>...
>
> In article <359807F4...@ho.me>,
> Deacon <charit...@ho.me> wrote:
>
> | > > Above all, be gentle, responsive, and understanding. Take good care
> of the
> | > > little man in the boat and you'll be well rewarded.
>
> In some places, girls get their little man cut off [I just read a really
> unpleasant article about that in a CD ROM I'm working on].
>
>
> --
> Mike Cohen - mike_cohen (at) pobox (dot) com - http://pobox.com/~macguru
> Sound is the same for all the world - Youssou N'dour, "Eyes Open"
>
Mr Bean
I am a man (well thats what mom says) and I havent the foggiest idea what a woman
wants, needs or will acept. I thought about takeing a course in this matter but for
some reason the local university doesnt have one.
JS
If they do, I'm sure it will be very hard to register for that class. ;)
Mr Bean <mrb...@gte.net> wrote in article
<6nceg3$nqo$2...@news-2.news.gte.net>...
JS
(Sigh) If you consider this to be jumping your ass, then you'd better not
get me pissed enough to flame you. I consider this just polite
conversation, with no ill regard, and viewable by all. I'm not any woman, I
am a man. And your experience is clouded by your judgements. No matter
what, you have no idea if they did or did not orgasm. Your experience is
nill, nada, nothing. It is 'her' experience which matters in these matters.
'Been there/done that' is a sign of youth. At a certain stage people
realize, or at least they should, that they are not the defining factor of
the world, i.e. that their own experience is not the standard, the end-all
be-all, the one and only truth. In other words, you are this ignorant.
And the answer to your typical 'how many have you fucked...' question
could be NONE, or it could be A THOUSAND, or it could be any number in
between. For all you know I very well could be married, or a virgin priest
living high in the mountains. WTF do you care, or are you that ignorant?
See, now I'm starting to get a little off beat, and the flames are
starting to rise. It just pissed me off when some fool pulls that,
be-there/done-that bullshit, when we aren't talking about the fool at
all. Are we not talking about what a woman wants sexually?
Or have we progressed into the sexual exploits of Stan. If that is the
case, this is getting quite boring.
...
On further reflection, Stan does indeed seem to be this ignorant. My post
he replied to seems to have been WAY over his head, as he finds it 'a
speech of nothing but generalizations and speculation'. Don't ever go into
court Stan, you really suck at argumentatives. What I don't get, Stan, is
how you could be so ignorant (you like that word don't you), to claim that
you, a man, knows anything about any woman. And then to top it off, keep
claiming to know these things. Stan, your whole life is a lie, I think you
need counciling. I just hope we don't see Stan out there selling his ass,
trying to raise enough cash for a sex change, just to find out what it is
really like to be a woman. ;) (This is jumping your ass, no?)
Pre-reply to flame posting: Yeah, so what.
stanley...@cyberdude.com wrote in article
<359bbe02...@news.mindspring.com>...
> On 1 Jul 1998 03:43:38 GMT, "JS" <john...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> Are you really this ignorant or is this just a joke? Jump my ass for
> alledgedly making generalizations by making a speech of nothing but
> generalizations and speculation? What a laugh! You are not EVERY
> woman. How many woman have you had sexual experiences with?????
>
> I know because I've been there/done that, many, many times. I speak
> solely from MY experiences. There ARE a few of us here well past
> puberty, you know.
>
Rabbit
stanley...@cyberdude.com wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jul 1998 02:24:14 GMT, Rabbit <rab...@hotstar.net> wrote:
>
> >stanley...@cyberdude.com wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 25 Jun 1998 21:32:29 -0700, bitb...@wolfenet.com (Sonya)
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >The only way a woman can orgasm is through clitoral stimulation of one
> >> >kind or another. Start by gently nuzzling around the area, then licking
> >> >softly around her labia (the "lips" of the vagina). Listen, now; I'm a
> >> >woman, I know what I'm speaking of.
> >>
> >> While this may be true for you, it is certainly NOT true for every
> >> woman. I can think of at least 3 other non-clitoral methods by which
> >> women can have an orgasm.
> >
> >And they are ... ?
> >
>
> Sorry, this is a South Park group, not sex education. You'll have to
> find yourself a girlfriend and learn it on your own.
But that would make me a lesbian ...
Rabbit
Keith M. Kurzman
JS (john...@microsoft.com) wrote:
> If you are not female, you just can not know these things, no
> matter what you may have seen, read, heard about, or experienced. You
> aren't one of 'them'.
>
> And I only know this, because women don't have a clue about a
> man's sexual drives. They may think they do, but the world just isn't
> that simple, and there are a whole lot of lies floating around in
> mainstream society.
...and I'd just like to interject as a bi-male that this is exactly why
gay sex is generally somewhat better than straight sex-- Other guys have a
much better idea how the equipment works. (I assume the same holds true
for lesbians/bi-females.)
--Chauvlin Stegosauvlin
JS
He doesn't know. And should he ever be dumb enough to post these '3 other
non-clitoral methods', we'll all probably laugh our asses off. Not to
mention that he said, 'at least', meaning he thinks he knows more.
Brewing Tea
>...and I'd just like to interject as a bi-male that this is exactly why
>gay sex is generally somewhat better than straight sex-- Other guys have a
>much better idea how the equipment works.
I've heard that is true, but if you're not gay, it's kind of a moot
(sp?) point... Isn't that a "catch-22"?
Brewing Tea
Remove the underscore "_" to reply via e-mail...
--------------------------------
Are you an MST3K fan looking for 'bot parts?
Do you have 'bot parts to trade?
Check out the new sections of Cat 33!
http://home.tampabay.rr.com/cat33
--------------------------------
MOWBIE
>From: "JS" <john...@microsoft.com>
>...........And I only know this, because women don't have a clue about a man's
sexual
>drives. They may think they do, but the world just isn't that simple, and
>there are a whole lot of lies floating around in mainstream society.
As usual when one generalizes one says stupid things. There are many, many
women on this planet earning a hell of a lot of money by knowing exactly what
fuels a man's sexual drive and how to satisfy it.
Do not condemn the judgment of another
because it differs from your own.
You may both be wrong. - Dandemis
Asethotep
>To hell with some invisible god and man's stupid book (aka the bible), to
>quote a famous man...'stay off my dick!'
I second that!
Asethotep (the naughty Pagan who couldn't resist)
JS
Self importance is something I do not have. I am that which I speak of,
and not these things you pretend that I am. How can you have credibility
(what ever the fuck that is supposed to be to you), when your arguments
against me are mostly conjectured within your own mind, and have no basis
from my posts. Yeah, I am older and thereby more experienced, and I share
what has occured in my life 'in each and every post' (which I might add,
you have not read). This is what you hate so much.
BTW Can't you even compose a message without petty name calling?
And this took another, WOW, ten seconds...why does it take you a half
hour?
Oh, and learn to post correctly, or at least more politely by not
including uneeded portions of the original message. Fuck it, no reply
wanted.
stanley...@cyberdude.com wrote in article
<359a58f...@news.mindspring.com>...
> You have no credibility at all. You are obviously the type who loves
> to go on and on and on and on about anything and everything. Just
> because you can sit there and pound your keys for a half hour DOES NOT
> give you intellegence. You do nothing but show your ignorance with
> each and every post. You keep wanting to make assumtions about me,
> you keep wanting to believe you have all the answers about life and
> sex. Well, you don't know a damn thing. All you want to do is argue.
> You don't care about what. You think it makes you big and important
> to respond to everything that gets posted here. It's so sad that you
> must rely on that for your feeling of self importance.
>
> Enough said. I'm not going to get dragged down and waste my time any
> further with ther likes of you. As I said, you have absolutely NO
> credibility.
>
Keith M. Kurzman
Brewing Tea (brew...@tampabay.rr.com) wrote:
> >...and I'd just like to interject as a bi-male that this is exactly why
> >gay sex is generally somewhat better than straight sex-- Other guys have a
> >much better idea how the equipment works.
>
> I've heard that is true, but if you're not gay, it's kind of a moot
> (sp?) point... Isn't that a "catch-22"?
Well... not being straight, I can't say for sure if this is true... but
I've heard that otherwise completely straight men who have no interest at
all in reciprocating in any way can still get more enjoyment out of a blow
job from an experienced guy than from most women. After all, there's
essentially no biological gender-difference where mouths are concerned.
But now we've gotten way, way, off topic so I'm not going to shut about
about the whole thing now.
Oh... and this is NOT an offer. :)
--C. S.
JS
Prosititutes don't fuel my sexual drive, as I do not find a slut
attractive, however, this is a personal, therefor an opinionated approach.
But then, this post has been misinterpereted, and it is a literal
comparison that I projected, not a comparison of the knowledge within the
mind, nor how to act on that knowledge. For those still confused, I
appologize, and restate it thus:
A man is not a woman, and a woman is not a man.
Is that better?
I find no generaliation within what I have said. And even science has
concluded the same. As a man who gets a sex change, still does not have the
chemical constitutes which makes a woman a woman. Even with brain scans,
there are vast differences based solely on gender. As I have said before,
humanity is a divided species. Man and woman are not the same creatures, we
do not have the same chemistry within us. How did oral sex suddenly turn
into genetics?
Oh well, no matter. Unlike some other fool, I don't take this seriously.
NG's are my leasure, what I do for enjoyment, not some contest or whatever
the hell that other guy thinks usenet is.
MOWBIE <mow...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199807012024...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> >From: "JS" <john...@microsoft.com>
Bill Lynch
Brewing Tea wrote:
>
(snip)
> I've heard that is true, but if you're not gay, it's kind of a moot
> (sp?) point... Isn't that a "catch-22"?
I'd guess it's more of a "catch-69", but the idea's the important thing.
Bill Lynch :-)
JS
> But then, this post has been misinterpereted, and it is a literal
> comparison that I projected, not a comparison of the knowledge within the
> mind, nor how to act on that knowledge. For those still confused, I
> appologize, and restate it thus:
>
> A man is not a woman, and a woman is not a man.
>
> Is that better?
>
For you, I will restate it thus:
If you are not a woman, you can not make declarations about women to a
woman. You replied first to Sonya's post, not I. I saw your post,
contemplated what I saw for a day or two, and decided to try and point out
the fact that you are not a woman, and shouldn't be submitting information
about women to women.
I guess, that I was wrong, you are indeed a woman, and merely wanted to
protray yourself using a SP male characters name on this NG. To that end, I
am the one to appologize for trying to argue a point about a woman with a
woman. Other then this, I am, and have been, correct in my knowledge and
stance, if not my methods.
I never came here to try to overpower people nor argue them into
submission. If I were to learn nothing here, I would not be here, as it
would bore me to no end. It is true, however, that there is enjoyment in
argument. I must add though, you also love to argue, or this thread would
never have grown so large. Just don't take this seriously. I expect, like
myself, that once the news reader is closed, no reference to the threads
herein should bother the mind in the least.
stanley...@cyberdude.com wrote in article
<359c4d2e...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
> I included them for a reason. You were the one who clipped pertinent
> portions of the posts, conviently deleting them from your memory at
> the same time. Learn to read!
>
> Start with the original post from Sonya that started this mess. The
> statement was, AND I QUOTE:
>
> "The only way a woman can orgasm is through clitoral stimulation of one
kind or another."
>
> That statement is NOT true for all women. I said it may be true for
> her, but not for all women. There are non-clitoral ways of acheiving
> orgasm.
>
> Now, go back and read your assinine post to me. Just how does my
> post relate to want a woman WANTS or DESIRES, as you claim?
>
> Like I said, all you want to do is argue.
>
AnnRKist1
>(which is
>> why men have nipples).
Actually this part is true-partly. Males have the make-up to be male but all
of the mother's hormones suppress developement of the penis and the testicles,
which is why the testicles don't "drop" until after a baby boy is born.
AnnRKist1
>Yeah, but men get their penis circumcized, which does not promote a
>healthier life, and reduces the sexual pleasure manyfold.
>
> Yeah, we can condemn the female mutilation, but what about us men!?
>
Women are circumcized in these societies so that they will not enjoy sex AT ALL
and be less likely to stray from their husbands, who even circumcized can still
enjoy sex above and beyond a circumcized woman...
qui...@na.da
adult's choice, not forced upon the newborn due to ignorant religious
beliefs. Parents should not even have the right to choose circumcision for
the child.
AnnRKist1 <annr...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199807120907...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
Brewing Tea
>adult's choice, not forced upon the newborn due to ignorant religious
>beliefs. Parents should not even have the right to choose circumcision for
>the child.
This is kinda off-topic, but parents make a lot of decisions "for" the
child. That's nothing new. If we let children make all their
decisions, none of them would live past 5 years old. As for
circumcision specifically, I'm glad my parents had it done back when I
had no chance of remembering it! I certainly wouldn't want to have it
done *now*... Ouch! :)
Also, many parents choose to have their children circumcised that
aren't even Jewish! It's not just religious, it's also more "healthy"
somehow. I'm no doctor, but you get the idea.
Brewing Tea
Remove the underscore "_" to reply via e-mail...
--------------------------------
Yes... Cat 33 is back in its original location!
Check out the 'Bot-part-trading sections for new parts!!
http://www.eng.usf.edu/~brewingt
--------------------------------
Rabbit
>
> Also, many parents choose to have their children circumcised that
> aren't even Jewish! It's not just religious, it's also more "healthy"
> somehow. I'm no doctor, but you get the idea.
>
>
The no doctor part is obvious. Circumcision has absolutely nothing to do with
health. It's done for religious purposes or for appearance only. The "health" part
of it came in when someone needed an excuse.
Rabbit
Asethotep
>aren't even Jewish! It's not just religious, it's also more "healthy"
>somehow. I'm no doctor, but you get the idea.
>
Actually circumcision became popular because it was thought to be cleaner....
shmegma and all. And it may have been years ago but now humans are much more
conscious of bathing than before and cirumcision really doesn't have a purpose
anymore.
Except maybe that some women, me included, find the circumcised man more
attractive.
Blessings,
Asethotep
Michael Bungey
writes
>>
>>
>> Also, many parents choose to have their children circumcised that
>> aren't even Jewish! It's not just religious, it's also more "healthy"
>> somehow. I'm no doctor, but you get the idea.
>>
>>
>
>health. It's done for religious purposes or for appearance only. The "health"
>part
>of it came in when someone needed an excuse.
quite a common operation as a medical one, due to some wierd, and
painful I might add, infection.
--
Michael Bungey
Zern
:: That still does not make it right. The choice to circumcize should be an
::adult's choice, not forced upon the newborn due to ignorant religious
::beliefs. Parents should not even have the right to choose circumcision for
::the child.
::
I think that, most often, parents don't make the conscious decision to
circumcise. It's pretty much standard practice in every hospital
(well every hospital in the US). In Europe, the procedure normally
isn't done unless it's requested.
As for the facts....a type of topical local anastesia is applied
before the procedure, so the baby doesn't feel a thing.
As for the myths....I saw, in a previous post, that sexual pleasure is
enhanced if you're not circumsized. Who could know. Are there any of
you out there who were circumsized as adults? Maybe, then, I'd buy
this myth. After all, only a person who was circumsized as an adult
could make the comparison.
Incidentally....parents have the right to choose many things for their
children. To me, circumcision is the least critical. Remember,
parents mold their children's religious beliefs, morals (or lack
thereof), and have total control over a child's believe system (e.g.
Santa Claus, God, etc). To me these kinds of things are more
important than whether a child has a "turtleneck" or "v-neck." Just
my two cents.
There's no substitue for a complete lack of preparation.
Please remove "NOSPAM" from the addy to reply
g...@NOSPAM.gci-net.com
Rabbit
Michael Bungey wrote:
Perhaps then you can enlighten me as to what this "weird and painful" infection is
called, how it is contracted, and why the foreskin is related to it. The
uncircumcized member of this household is quite interested in knowing more about
your medical information.
Rabbit
Jon
Zern wrote:
I'm not circumsized but I figure the loss of sexual pleasure might come from the
desensitisation of the tip of the penis from not being covered. ie: rubbing day
after day against your underpants for years and years...
Just a guess!
Jon
John Washington
chance of infection as there is with any other unexposed body part.
Circumcision is a purely religious act of mutliation, by a religion that
has never been able to grasp human sexuality. To pass it off as a 'common
operation' does not in any way hide the fact that it is simply mutilation
biased by religious prejudices. To avoid that 'weird, and
painful...infection', just try bathing regularly and properly (like letting
yourself *thoroughly* dry out). Why is everyone arguing this point anyway?
This has all been documented in medical texts, and has been widely taught
in the public institutions for the past ten to fifteen years. Did some of
you youngins' skip sex ed and health classes?
Maybe before bathing was accepted as 'correct', there was a need to
circumcize (yes, for centuries Chistian nations taught that bathing was a
sin, and forbade the population to bath). But the rule sticks, 'if it ain't
broke, don't fix it'. Preventive measures be damned, I'll qoute again,
"Stay off my dick!"
JS
"It is not life which is important, but the quality of life."
Michael Bungey <michael...@saintmatt.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<fYeSpBAW...@saintmatt.demon.co.uk>...
> In article <35ABFDC4...@hotstar.net>, Rabbit <rab...@hotstar.net>
> writes
> >
John Washington
cut it off, reduces the amount of nerve endings via the amount of mass
hacked away. That in itself desensitizes the penis.
JS
Jon <jo...@videotron.ca> wrote in article
<35B2D403...@videotron.ca>...
John Washington
<35b6a5d4...@news.gci-net.com>...
> On 13 Jul 1998 20:47:03 GMT, <qui...@na.da> wrote:
>
> As for the facts....a type of topical local anastesia is applied
> before the procedure, so the baby doesn't feel a thing.
Pain, is not the point.
> As for the myths....I saw, in a previous post, that sexual pleasure is
> enhanced if you're not circumsized.
Strange, how in certain parts of the world, facts are myths. But you have
it backwards (should I have led you there, or wrote otherwise, sorry).
Sexual pleasure is *normal* for the uncircumcized. It is degraded for those
which are mutilated in such a way. If you are circumsized, don't worry
about it, what is done, is done. But just insure that it is not done to
someone else (like your son).
> children. To me, circumcision is the least critical.
Sure, but try replacing the word 'circumcision' with 'mutilation' in your
mental dictionary. Because unrequested mutilation is what this is all
about. This off-thread started, after all, with female circumcision (before
that it was female oral pleasure).
Remember,
> parents mold their children's religious beliefs, morals (or lack
> thereof), and have total control over a child's believe system (e.g.
> Santa Claus, God, etc). To me these kinds of things are more
> important than whether a child has a "turtleneck" or "v-neck." Just
> my two cents.
Remember,
Children are born with a personality already formed. It can be guided, but
they are the individuals that they are. They are not machines by which
parents (nor governments) can easily program. It is the child which has
total control over its own beliefs, which is made evident when the child
learns to express inner thoughts. It is not always the parents fault when
the child learns to believe in stupid things, sometimes the child just
doesn't pay enough attension to the facts at hand.
There is no comparison between clothing and a mutilated penis.
> There's no substitue for a complete lack of preparation.
And I hate in post replies, so I apologize for this.
JS
ti...@enteract.bottblock.com
> Strange, how in certain parts of the world, facts are myths. But you have
> it backwards (should I have led you there, or wrote otherwise, sorry).
> Sexual pleasure is *normal* for the uncircumcized. It is degraded for those
> which are mutilated in such a way. If you are circumsized, don't worry
> about it, what is done, is done. But just insure that it is not done to
> someone else (like your son).
Just to toss in a couple of pennies here - this discussion came up on
another board (I don't remember which one) about six months ago, and had
contributions from both circed and uncirced males - including at least one
who was circed after he had reached maturity and said he felt more
pleasure after being circed than before.
So to put down any sort of blanket statement about whose pleasure is
"normal" and whose is "degraded" is futile, at best. It's a highly
individualistic thing.
Just something to think about,
Tirya
NarcNarc
> Too little, too late, I'm afraid. My son was born 11 months ago and,
> yes, was circumcized. Hopefully, 18 years from now, my son doesn't
> manuveur me into getting on Oprah
>
> Zern
Or worst yet, Jerry Springer! 8()
Slightly Askew
>Zern <g...@NOSPAM.gci-net.com> wrote in article
><35b6a5d4...@news.gci-net.com>...
>> On 13 Jul 1998 20:47:03 GMT, <qui...@na.da> wrote:
>>
>> As for the facts....a type of topical local anastesia is
applied
>> before the procedure, so the baby doesn't feel a thing.
>
> Pain, is not the point.
>
>> As for the myths....I saw, in a previous post, that sexual
pleasure is
>> enhanced if you're not circumsized.
>
you have
>it backwards (should I have led you there, or wrote otherwise,
sorry).
>Sexual pleasure is *normal* for the uncircumcized. It is degraded
for those
>which are mutilated in such a way. If you are circumsized, don't
worry
>about it, what is done, is done. But just insure that it is not
done to
>someone else (like your son).
>
>
> Sure, but try replacing the word 'circumcision' with
'mutilation' in your
>mental dictionary. Because unrequested mutilation is what this is
all
>about. This off-thread started, after all, with female
circumcision (before
>that it was female oral pleasure).
So I take it you are against piercing a baby girl's ears? How
about hair cuts? Should you not cut a child's hair until he/she
is mature enough to make that decision for themselves? I think
that is mutilation. Now go away.
RS
--
"One...two...five" "Three, sir." "Three!!"
"Could you help these twenty good people?" -- MP
John Washington
as what you wrote deserves it. You really think that there is a comparison
between the penis and a hair cut?
Come on, what 'witty' thing can you spout next?
I started this off-topic thread, and I am not going away. O'damn, my
flight to China leaves in an hour. ;)
JS
Slightly Askew <slig...@iquest.fishing-gear> wrote in article
<Yvlt1.98$3o.3...@news.netdirect.net>...
John Washington
senstivity to touch. Unless you have documented proof of such a thing
occuring, I am inclinded to doubt that the individual in question was
telling the truth, or maybe it is as I describe below. Most men that have
sex before and after circumcision have reported a loss in pleasure...
But then to which pleasure are you refering. The sense of touch, or the
ejaculation?
To some men, the sense of touch is much more pleasurable then ejaculation.
The truth could be that he may have been referring to the documented fact,
that most uncircumcized men reach ejaculation quicker then those who have
been circumcized. Perhaps the length of his enjoyment, was the factor he
was talking about.
It is not a blanket statement to call an uncircumcized penis 'normal'.
That is merely an obvious fact of reality.
In any case, this really isn't important anymore. As the majority of
posters fail to realize the point of this thread, which is, that one can
not cry out about the brutality of female circumcision and then turn around
and ignore male circumcision. They are both inhumane and cruel practices.
ti...@enteract.bottblock.com wrote in article
<6p3avl$1a7$3...@eve.enteract.com>...
D'arcy007
Zern wrote:
> On 21 Jul 1998 23:59:21 GMT, "John Washington" <jwas...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> :: Strange, how in certain parts of the world, facts are myths. But you have
> ::it backwards (should I have led you there, or wrote otherwise, sorry).
> ::Sexual pleasure is *normal* for the uncircumcized. It is degraded for those
> ::which are mutilated in such a way. If you are circumsized, don't worry
> ::about it, what is done, is done. But just insure that it is not done to
> ::someone else (like your son).
>
> Too little, too late, I'm afraid. My son was born 11 months ago and,
> yes, was circumcized. Hopefully, 18 years from now, my son doesn't
> manuveur me into getting on Oprah
>
> Zern
>
> There's no substitute for a complete lack of preparation.
> g...@NOSPAM.gci-net.com
I wouldn't worry about Oprah....I'd worry about Jerry Springer! That's a show I
never wanna be on!!!!!!!!!!!!
-me
PS. I can just see the title (Dad you circumsised me! You BASTARD!)
MOWBIE
>Should you not cut a child's hair until he/she
>is mature enough to make that decision for themselves? I think
>that is mutilation.
You think cutting hair is mutilation?!? I think they may have medication now
for your condition. In the mean time stay away from sharp objects.
I have been asked during these last weeks who caused the riots and
the killing in L.A., my answer is simple: Who is to blame for the riots?
The rioters are to blame. Who is to blame for the killings?
The killers are to blame. -Dan Quayle
Keith M. Kurzman
> So I take it you are against piercing a baby girl's ears? How
> is mature enough to make that decision for themselves? I think
Uh... yeah, actually-- piecing a baby girl's ears IS a bad idea. (Duh!) As
for hair cuts, it's *a little* different:
1. Hair cuts don't hurt.
2. Hair grows back.
A better comparison to circumcision would be if everyone was given a nose
job when they were born: Maybe it's an improvement, maybe it's not-- but
it certainly shouldn't be done until the kid is old enough to make up his
or her own mind.
--C. S.
Jacque Bussey
hooking me up when I was a baby and too young to remember it! Plus I dont think I
got hard on's at that age and it probably made the healing easier!
Jacque
Zern wrote:
> On 13 Jul 1998 20:47:03 GMT, <qui...@na.da> wrote:
>
KrytenToo
there was one guy that I had never seen before. Someone told me that the
guy had not been invited, but that he "never missed a bris".
This is even wierder than seeing Leonard Maltin on Freakazoid the week after
seeing him in "Mecha Streissand".
Anyone else have any bizarre SP coincidences to report?
Jeremy B
"Our special tonight is poached 'go to hell'"- Crow T. Robot
paradigm
first i would like to thank everyone who participated in this discussion, i
think i am genuinely dumber for having read your posts **cough** LOSERS
**cough**
secondly, until i see proof of a medical degree from any of you (south
american universities are acceptable), why would i believe one goddam thing
i read here? i think the most intelligent thing mentioned was "how can
anyone know whether sensation is diminished unless they were circumcised as
an adult?".
the following is an excerpt from encarta...
Circumcision, surgical removal of all or part of the foreskin of the human
male or of the corresponding tissues of the female. Circumcision of males
has been widely practiced as a religious rite since ancient times. Although
its origins are unknown, earliest evidence of the practice dates from
ancient Egypt about 2300 BC, when it is thought to have been used to mark
male slaves.
Among some ethnic and religious groups, circumcision is associated with
puberty rites. The operation certifies the subject's readiness for marriage
and adulthood and testifies to his or her ability to withstand pain.
Circumcision may also be used to distinguish a cultural group from its
uncircumcised neighbors.
In Jewish religious tradition, infant male circumcision is required as part
of Abraham's covenant with God. According to the Levitical law, every Jewish
male infant must be circumcised on the eighth day after birth. Among the
Arabs, circumcision existed before the time of Muhammad (before AD 70).
Islamic custom demands that Muslim males be circumcised before marriage.
Some Mediterranean and Islamic countries practice female circumcision.
Circumcision is absent from the Hindu, Buddhist, and Confucian traditions.
Since the 19th century, many English-speaking peoples have adopted the
custom of circumcision, primarily for medical reasons. However, the medical
case for circumcision is unproved and controversial.
Rabbit
>
> So I take it you are against piercing a baby girl's ears?
Absolutely.
Rabbit
Bean11774
>Since the 19th century, many English-speaking peoples have adopted the
>custom of circumcision, primarily for medical reasons. However, the medical
>case for circumcision is unproved and controversial.
Dr. Drew says that there has never been a case of testicular cancer in a male
that has been circumcised.
my MTV medical knowledge!
ti...@enteract.bottblock.com
Dr. Drew is full of crap.
> my MTV medical knowledge!
Hope you're not pinning med school admission on it! :)
Tirya
Bean11774
>male
>> that has been circumcised.
>
>Dr. Drew is full of crap.
>
>
Hell, no. Dr. Drew is great and always knows what he's talking about. I've
been listening to him for a long time, before the MTV show ever came about.
The thing about this random fact is the fact that testicular cancer is so rare
anyway it really can't be linked to circumcision...
>> my MTV medical knowledge!
>
>Hope you're not pinning med school admission on it! :)
Actually, I am... why, you don't think I'll be admitted???
ti...@enteract.bottblock.com
> >> Dr. Drew says that there has never been a case of testicular cancer in a
> >male
> >> that has been circumcised.
> >
> >Dr. Drew is full of crap.
> Hell, no. Dr. Drew is great and always knows what he's talking about. I've
> been listening to him for a long time, before the MTV show ever came about.
> The thing about this random fact is the fact that testicular cancer is so rare
> anyway it really can't be linked to circumcision...
Well, I for one can disprove Dr. Drew's theory of "there has never been a
case of testicular cancer in a male that has been circumcised" with a
quick glance at the medical records of a dear friend of mine. It's the
blanket statement that got my back up.
> >> my MTV medical knowledge!
> >
> >Hope you're not pinning med school admission on it! :)
> Actually, I am... why, you don't think I'll be admitted???
Hmmm... well, actually, considering some of the doctors I've been to, you
may well be! ::grin::
Tirya
Rabbit
Bean11774 wrote:
> >Circumcision is absent from the Hindu, Buddhist, and Confucian traditions.
> >Since the 19th century, many English-speaking peoples have adopted the
> >custom of circumcision, primarily for medical reasons. However, the medical
> >case for circumcision is unproved and controversial.
>
> Dr. Drew says that there has never been a case of testicular cancer in a male
> that has been circumcised.
>
> my MTV medical knowledge!
Useless information unless you can provide the statistics of how many
uncircumcized men have suffered from it.
Rabbit
Bean11774
>case of testicular cancer in a male that has been circumcised" with a
>quick glance at the medical records of a dear friend of mine. It's the
>blanket statement that got my back up.
REALLY?!?! You mean Dr. Drew was wrong??? Oh my heavens, how do I go on....
Bean11774
>uncircumcized men have suffered from it.
>
>
I know... it is a very rare form of cancer, but most men don't even know they
have it until it's too late. Men are not educated to check themselves as women
are (with breast cancer)... this is more usless info I read in a nursing
magazine 3 years ago. :)
I'll keep trying to help with vague observations!
smiles,
christine
Charles Drumright
>> Dr. Drew says that there has never been a case of testicular cancer in a
male
>> that has been circumcised.
>
>Dr. Drew is full of crap.
>
Doc Drew is not full of crap....his stupid sidekick is.....remember, Doc
Drew has a medical degree! and has been practicing medicine for quite some
time now! i give him quite a bit of credit for being as knowledgable as he
is!
panthyr
Bean11774
>Drew has a medical degree! and has been practicing medicine for quite some
>time now! i give him quite a bit of credit for being as knowledgable as he
>is!
>
>
I love Dr. Drew!!!! He is always right on target and when he talks about his
kids, oh man, he's just so *dreamy*!
ti...@enteract.bottblock.com
> >> Dr. Drew says that there has never been a case of testicular cancer in a
> male
> >> that has been circumcised.
> >
> >Dr. Drew is full of crap.
> Doc Drew is not full of crap....his stupid sidekick is.....remember, Doc
> Drew has a medical degree! and has been practicing medicine for quite some
> time now! i give him quite a bit of credit for being as knowledgable as he
> is!
Hopefully you can read my following response in this thread.
Or should I tell my circumcised friend that he really didn't have
testicular cancer, after all?
Tirya
"Never say 'never'."
ti...@enteract.bottblock.com
> >Hopefully you can read my following response in this thread.
> >
> >Or should I tell my circumcised friend that he really didn't have
> >testicular cancer, after all?
> No, you should tell your friend he wasn't circumcised...
LOL! Pass, thanks... knowing him, he'd offer to prove it!! He's a dear
friend - I'd like to keep it that way! ::grin::
Tirya
Bean11774
l...@l.com
In article <35BD2C9F...@hotstar.net>, rab...@hotstar.net wrote:
>
>
>Bean11774 wrote:
>
>> >Circumcision is absent from the Hindu, Buddhist, and Confucian traditions.
>> >Since the 19th century, many English-speaking peoples have adopted the
>> >custom of circumcision, primarily for medical reasons. However, the medical
>> >case for circumcision is unproved and controversial.
>>
>> Dr. Drew says that there has never been a case of testicular cancer in a male
>> that has been circumcised.
>>
>> my MTV medical knowledge!
>
>Useless information unless you can provide the statistics of how many
>uncircumcized men have suffered from it.
>
>Rabbit
>
Bean11774
Then skip it, you freak...
what a waste of a post,
just like this, actually...
nevermind, let's talk about Dr. Drew again...
Mystery Woman
(Eric Cartman)
hehe
On Wed, 01 Jul 1998 04:40:47 GMT, stanley...@cyberdude.com wrote:
>On Wed, 01 Jul 1998 02:24:14 GMT, Rabbit <rab...@hotstar.net> wrote:
>
>>stanley...@cyberdude.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 25 Jun 1998 21:32:29 -0700, bitb...@wolfenet.com (Sonya)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >The only way a woman can orgasm is through clitoral stimulation of one
>>> >kind or another. Start by gently nuzzling around the area, then licking
>>> >softly around her labia (the "lips" of the vagina). Listen, now; I'm a
>>> >woman, I know what I'm speaking of.
>>>
>>> While this may be true for you, it is certainly NOT true for every
>>> woman. I can think of at least 3 other non-clitoral methods by which
>>> women can have an orgasm.
>>
>>And they are ... ?
>>
>
>Sorry, this is a South Park group, not sex education. You'll have to
>find yourself a girlfriend and learn it on your own.