(October 7, 2016 at 5:58 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:(October 7, 2016 at 5:12 pm)RobertE Wrote: I have nothing against CL either. However, lopping a piece of skin off and then celebrating like they have won the superbowl with a barbecue and a beer in each hand, just sucks for the child, and all that because of some fallacy about being cut and being hygienic as opposed to being "uncut", and being dirty as fuck. You have to read in between the lines EP. If what her MIL stated is true, that uncut men are dirty, then that is the vibe I got when I read one of her first posts. If you are comparing one thing to another, even without saying mentioning the other object, the actual implication is there and that is what Rythym is talking about.
Give me a break. She never said "uncut men are dirty."
It is true that things tend to get more gritty in between folds of skin vs if they were exposed to airflow. That's just common sense. But it isn't about being "dirty" or "clean"... it's about what that might mean, healthwise, for the man, or for the woman he is having sex with.
As I said, I don't understand what it is with yall's obsession trying to make this like it's some sort of religious clean vs unclean thing for me.
Where is your evidence for this or are you talking personally? Remember, men have foreskins and women have inner and outer labia so please, don't tell me that women cannot get "gritty." Remember, you are giving eyewitness evidence for your "gritty", reference and I took a reference from a link to the British Journal of Urology's journal. Which do you think I would choose? Remember, urologists don't take 5 cases, they take possibly 1,000 times as much.
