@swirlie I have a good friend who spent 6 years in London Ontario doing a PhD at U of Western Ontario. We have had long conversations about life and culture in SW Ontario. I spent a half decade living in suburban Detroit. John Kenneth Galbraith grew up on a farm 10 miles inland from Lake Erie. He wrote in his memoirs that he had no difficulty doing his PhD at Berkeley and then becoming an influential American public servant and public intellectual.
Canadian YouTubers reveal that American ways of thinking, and of amusing themselves, resonate very well with Canadians of the same age. While the Canadian Federal constitution differs from that of the USA, because Canada has remained loyal to the Westminster tradition, Canadian law is quite similar to American law.

A large proportion of Albertans are of American ancestry, a fact which helps explain how Albertans vote and what churches they attend.

@swirlie A growing number of American parents are questioning the Bald Penis status quo, starting with two simple reasons: (1) RIC hurts like hell,(2) there is no honest counting of the number of RICs that go rogue, and (3) a man should have a say in how that very sexual part of his anatomy looks and functions.
The influence of American culture on southwest Ontario is, like it or not, strong.

West of the continental divide, the most forward looking part of the USA, RIC has become a minority of choice among young parents. One day, American pediatricians and obgyns will agree that RIC is indefensible, and the American Bald Penis will die out.

@swirlie The best foreskin friendly videos in YouTube were all created by women. I surmise that women have evolved to be turned on by the loose moving skin on the penis. This skin can be looked at, moved by hands/feet/mouth, and experienced vaginally. I also believe that the foreskin is a feminine detail in the most masculine place, just as the clitoris is a masculine detail in the most feminine place. Hence sexuality is a yin and yang affair. The best evidence we have that the male foreskin can enhance sexual pleasure, is testimonials by American and Canadian women who've been intimate with both kinds of men.

@consa01
"The best foreskin friendly videos in YouTube were all created by women...".
[c=#008099]
I never knew that foreskin-friendly videos were made by women, but when I stop and think about it I have to ask myself, how could a man have made any of those videos when a man in fact has no inherent understanding of his foreskin's relationship to any female out there? Only she is aware of her intimate knowledge for sure and only she can convey with authenticity, what his foreskin's relationship could possibly mean to her. This fact is captured exceedingly well in videos which involve women interacting with intimate intent toward the male foreskin.
[/c]
"I surmise that women have evolved to be turned on by the loose moving skin on the penis.."
[c=#008099]
I think what you are witnessing in those foreskin-friendly videos, is a more abstract fact of otherwise hidden feminine desire, than of an evolution of female awareness toward the loose moving skin on a penis.

I was born into a Scandinavian-cultured household, but my country of birth was Canada. My sisters and I were home-schooled insofar as our sex education was concerned due to a distinct lack of meaningful content in the Canadian high school sex-ed curriculum. By contrast, my Canadian-born, Canadian-cultured girlfriends knew only about sex what the school system and their Canadian-born mothers could impart to them, which was essentially a distinct illiteracy toward their own sexuality, let alone their complete lack of awareness toward the male foreskin.

In that Canadian-cultured sex-ed curriculum, lies an inherently deficient acknowledgement of the male foreskin. In other words, the Canadian school system makes the assumption that all males will be circumcised at birth and therefore, knowledge of their foreskin is left behind at the hospital shortly after almost all Canadian males are born. Fortunately, that 19th Century medical mentality is changing in Canada.

In contrast to Canada, the high school sex-education curriculum in all high schools in any Scandinavian country make the opposite presumption about the male foreskin, thereby teaching males and females alike that all males will go into adolescence and then adulthood, fully intact from birth.

Speaking to my Canadian-cultured girlfriends back in the day about performing oral sex on a boyfriend who happens to be fully intact, was initially met with shock and non-comprehension from them, at which point my own sanity came into question by them, more so than the prospect of a lone male actually looming somewhere 'out there' in the shadows of the student parking lot whom had not actually been circumcised.

Imparting to them what my sisters and I were taught at home, soon made my girlfriends realize that I was regularly experiencing something in my social life that almost all adolescent Canadian girls and adult women alike could not even speak about publicly, let alone experience first-hand from a fully intact male. Un-circumcised males therefore, have never been on the social radar of the vast majority of Canadian women, because those same women will naturally default to the presumption that an un-circumcised condition will rarely exist anywhere in their social circles.

When you then "surmise that women have evolved to be "turned-on" by the loose moving skin on the penis", it is not actually a question of women's awareness thus evolution toward the moving parts inherent of a foreskin. It is more of an understanding that should be shared among men more so than women, that all women from a global perspective, intuitively possess full knowledge and inherent appreciation for a guy's foreskin, but through cultural default, many women particularly North American women, have never been permitted by their own cultural misgivings to experience those inherent, intuitive 'desires', due in part by the fact that any potential male-mate in her immediate world was circumcised at birth.

The vast majority of North American males therefore, have never experienced life with their OWN foreskin, let alone had the opportunity of being the provider of a foreskin to a woman who might actually be interested in experiencing all the moving skin a fully intact penis offers.

So, it's not actually about women evolving as suggested, because most North American women have no male foreskin to evolve WITH. Add what adolescent girls have been taught from the foreskin-absent sex-ed high school system, plus further exacerbate that excruciating lack of knowledge with a litany of old wives tales that were passed onto them from their mothers and grandmothers about fully intact males, you then end up with what appears to be an overall 'stalling' of sex evolution within North America in terms of a woman's relationship with a male foreskin, in addition to a male's absent relationship with his own surgically absent foreskin, which for the most part was decided FOR him by his mother!

Truth is, sex evolution has not yet evolved to modern global standards anywhere within North America, leaving mothers to essentially follow in lockstep with a mindset born of the mid-1800's in Canada and the USA. Knowing this, it makes absolute sense why so many American women voted for Donald J. Trump in 2016. Intact foreskins or Trump as President, it all comes down to not knowing any better when left with the decision. [/c]

@swirlie It is my understanding that routine circumcision is nonexistent in the Maritimes, and among First Nations / Inuit and nonMuslim immigrants, uncommon among francophones, down to 40% in Alberta and Ontario, and a minority choice in the rest of Canada. Nowhere is Canada like the American midwest, where the Hooded Warrior = Weird Dick.

@Ozdharma: It took me several decades to appreciate that I was not weird but lucky. There was no talk in the USA that the foreskin and its motion improve sex, until the 1990s.

@kaf9292:

Yes, you are unique! But you are only speaking of your uniqueness from your own unique perspective, which is at least equal to the unique perspective of the female whom also shares with you her beneficiary status! Happy for you!

@swirlie: I share my life with my nudist spouse for the past many years. We share the shower. Literally, we have nothing to hide from one another. Thanks for your wonderful comment. 👍

@consa01:

I did not know that about Eric Clapton! I did meet Eric on an airplane almost 10 years ago however. I sat beside him from Toronto to Vancouver, but that aspect of himself never came up in conversation.

Yes, I think your mother probably would have been wary of confiding in me, considering the fact that I would not have been able to relate to her Roman Catholic bias she held within her life. The fact that I would not have presented myself to her as coming from some level of Roman Catholic stock would most likely have set the stage for her wariness of me, without question. I would also suggest that my chances of even encountering her for that potential meeting would be somewhat remote as a result of this stated fact about myself.

Yet still, your mother confided in you regarding her thoughts about sex, no differently than my own mother confided in me (as well as my sisters), regarding her thoughts about sex which included her opinion about foreskins. Keep in mind your comment earlier to me, whereby you stated that you could not imaging a mother talking to one of her children about foreskins, as I had stated to you that my mother had spoken to me about. Truth is, your mother obviously spoke her truth to you alone about sex and did so without hesitation, which you should be very proud of. You should be proud of her stating her 'truth' to you and you should also be proud that she trusted you implicitly.

The only difference I can see at this point between your mother and my mother, is that my mother never once told me NOT to repeat what she said, to my father. And what she was saying to me was often said in front of my siblings at midnight at the kitchen table. Her thoughts always seemed to involve a comparison of knowledge between herself and that of myself and my siblings. I have two sisters; the youngest being one year younger than myself and the eldest being one year older than I am.

My mother would be our primary mentor on such issues as sex, boyfriends and foreskins, yet she did not ask us 'directly' about our own personal, intimate business affairs either. She waited for us to volunteer that information to her and when we did, she too would volunteer information about her own free-spirited social escapades that we never actually had thought about before. As a result, our relationship with her became a two-way street and she was never critical of decisions we had made. In acknowledgement of that fact, we were not judgmental of her past activity nor of her present interests or unfulfilled desires.

Basically, she was confiding in my two sisters and I, no differently than we learned to confide in her. She was never attempting to hide her thoughts from my father who is also Scandinavian, but despite his cultural 'open mindedness' regarding the subject of sex for example, he was always a 'man's man', but living-out an existence within a house full of tall, thin, platinum blond haired women who quite often forgot he was there.

Although we were living in a rural environment and that I could drive a small tractor pulling a farm wagon to assist my father on a regular basis, our conversations never centered around the mechanics of motorized 'things' or the technicalities of rural living for that matter. Our conversations would usually surround his subjective observations of how the hired help would stop working whenever I showed up on the scene!

He always thought it was amusing to watch those young guys responding to me in such a totally submissive way (as he put it), while pretending not to notice from a distance! (lol!). And although I could ask him a question about men (which was any guy older than me), which may have included thoughts about their foreskin of which I would admit to him that I was already intimately familiar with, he would answer my question very honestly but would never elaborate beyond the face value of my question. To get him to elaborate, I would have to ask him yet another related question. And so piece by piece, I would get my curiosities answered in a roundabout way by my father.

As well, my father would never hesitate to ask me a question about my own body. His question however, was usually worded in such a way so as to serve as a lead-up to making me aware of how my body, or aspects of my body, was becoming an issue he had observed among the young migrant farm workers he would have hired annually to work in the tobacco fields.

He would never turn into a defensive father on me in an attempt to protect his daughter's best interest, but he would never hesitate to give me a lesson in life with how a man would typically view a woman in the circumstances I would often present myself on a hot, summer's day. This was usually precipitated by how I was dressed, or how I postured myself on that tractor, or how I interacted with those young farm workers as I stood up on the wagon while they stood down on the ground loading it! I would then take the loaded wagon to the tobacco kilns where yet another crew would be eagerly awaiting my return to unload it.

My father thought my natural instincts as a young, teenaged woman were more than amusing to him, yet he felt compelled at times to tell me some things about myself which he 'assumed' I was completely oblivious to. Of course, I would always say, "Oh really!? I never knew that!". We would both laugh at my 'apparent' innocence but then he would take great pride in telling me how he would have viewed someone 'just like me' if he were my age and still attending high school as I was! And I would always tell him that if he were my age, I would always play 'hard-to-get', giving him the excuse that my father would probably have taught me to do that! And I always thanked him for his very candid opinion and would always encourage him to continue to be my father and mentor me, his daughter, as he saw fit.

It was this kind of relationship I have always had with my father that enabled him to communicate with me on the same platform of respect and understanding that he knew his daughters had all established with their mother. He was never compelled to sit at the kitchen table at midnight talking about sex over a cup of tea, but he was always compelled to talk about the focused minds of young men in the middle of a hot afternoon who had a higher priority on their minds than making big money harvesting tobacco!

I find it absolutely amazing to learn from you, that the most fanatical defenders of circumcision you have ever encountered, are conformist Americans. Somehow, I had always imagined that fact to be true, but I could never substantiate those intuitive thoughts of mine which now support what you say.

@swirlie: 1960-2000, RIC was so common among Americans born in maternity wards to native born parents, that American boys would often graduate from high school having never seen intact. Keep in mind that I never heard a dirty joke or bawdy quip touching on circumcision until I was in college. American women would first hear of the male foreskin when doing their first prenatal class. I am confident that millions of American women have never seen an intact penis, either in porn as well as IRL. For millions of Americans, the glans is supposed to be fully exposed at all times, and the intact penis is disgusting and, worse yet, sexually off-putting. Islamic tradition dictated that boys were to be circumcised as toilet trained toddlers, not before. Hence Muslim kids grew up seeing intact little boys. Judaism talks about circumcision a lot, so that Jews know that they have surgically altered penises. African and South Korean boys are cut as teens. Baby boom moms often did not see their sons naked until after they had been circumcised. The USA became the first culture where circumcision was both extremely common, and seldom talked about outside of obgyn and pediatric circles. The upshot is a country where articulate opposition to routine circumcision is strong, where there are men who are quite angry about being cut (and told nothing about it when they were growing up), and also where many parents insist on their right to have their infant sons cut.

I grew up in tobacco farming country. I will mix socially with outdoor smokers.

@consa01:

I find your research to be extremely informative. I have girlfriends today, who although were very sexually active during our mutual times in University/College, have never actually seen a foreskin on a male to this very day. I speak to them of my own experiences, yet they cannot figure out why I have had as many experiences with un-circumcised men, as they have had with circumcised men. How did this happen when we went to the same place and experienced life there at the same time?, they ask me!

It's all about 'manifestation', I always tell them. Obviously, they were manifesting circumcised men to come into their lives and their manifestations obviously came to fruition!

Although my parents own a tobacco farm, nobody in our family ever smoked! I use to smuggle tobacco leaves to high school for my friends, which they would crush up into little pieces and then make roll-your-own cigarettes from cigarette papers they could buy. Although in those times I would be around friends who would experiment with smoking using tobacco I had provided for them, I have absolutely no tolerance today to be around anyone who is smoking within about 100 yards of me! I even avoid people who smoke outdoors!

In Canada, there is no such thing anymore, as smoking in a restaurant, or smoking outside on a patio at a restaurant or even smoking outside the entrance door of any commercial building, including government buildings. Smoking laws within Canada have pretty much forced smokers back into the closet where they all started out in the first place.

As well, a parent will be charged by police, if they smoke in their car and anyone is in the car with them that is under the age of 18, which is the minimum age in Canada to purchase cigarettes. This law came into effect about 5 years ago, to prevent infants and young children from being exposed to second-hand smoke from a parent or guardian while in the car. Effectively, the law protects children from their own parent's addiction to nicotine.

Before 1980 or so, men in public restrooms, locker rooms and public showers were a lot less self-conscious than they are now. Most males did nothing in such venues to conceal their circ status. That's why I acquired so much "data", leading me to conclude that the USA is an Empire of the Bald Penis.

Only 3 first world countries still circumcise a majority of boys: South Korea, Israel and.... the USA. Even in these countries, the rate is declining.

What I feared was the culture of bullying and ridicule that pervaded middle and high school. It took me decades to notice that once I left high school, the only persons who cared what my dick looked like were the woman who invited me into their bedrooms. I was very afraid of American women seeing me with my trousers down. Nowadays a lot of younger American women know what uncut looks like, and are curious about its sexual properties. There is a lot of talk on the internet that foreskin motion during PIV makes for a better ride. A lot of women perk up when they read this, because a lot of women have trouble enjoying PIV.

@consa01:

About the same very low percentage of circumcisions occur in Scandinavian countries as well and of those 1-2% of boys/men who are cut, it too is for therapeutic reasons.

Very good dad that you would talk to your daughters about circumcision! In my Scandinavian-cultured home where I was born and raised in Canada after my parents immigrated to Canada, it was usually my mother that did the teaching to my sisters and I at our kitchen table at midnight.

You might also mention to your daughters that a foreskin's purpose was more for the benefit of any woman who came into a guy's life, than for the guy himself. I am not at all aware of course, what kind of an open-channel of communication you have with your daughters, but our mother explained to my sisters and I how a foreskin should be managed during oral intercourse, which were mentored sessions that occurred when we were 13, 14 and 15 years of age respectively, myself being the one in the middle.

In our culture, private yet supervised 'exploration' between girl and guy is permitted, but only in the home of the girl while a parent or guardian is also present in the house. This can begin no earlier than the age of 14, with intercourse strictly prohibited prior to 16. As well, the boy's parents are made aware by the girl's parents that supervised 'dating' would be occurring in the home, which then put everyone on the same page the day it was happening. There was no hiding as to one's whereabouts and there was no question 'whom' the girl was with if a pregnancy happened to occur, although extremely rare.

The deal was, all parents concerned, mutually took absentee responsibility for their respective kid's actions, meaning it is understood by the boy's parents that they are 'on the hook' if their son broached the golden rule and got the girl pregnant. If she were attempting to enforce the golden rule and he would not comply, it would then be understood by all parties that the situation would be treated as rape of a minor. Needless to say, the boy's got a different 'briefing' from their father, than the girls got from their mother before the boy ever left his parent's house!

Between the ages of 14 and 16, a girl can experiment or explore with her boyfriend and vice-versa within the comfort of a supervised environment. In my sisters and my case, our shared bedroom was our comfort zone, while our mother would be reading a Danielle Steele novel during those critical times while down in the living room of our house! My mother was always very cool about sex and exploratory sex.

She developed a special 'code' that was only understood between herself and myself and my two sisters. If on a Sunday afternoon, she got her Danielle Steele novel down from the bookshelf in the living room and placed it faced-up on the coffee table, my sisters and I were not permitted to go upstairs to our shared bedroom, which was just down the hall from my parent's bedroom... which was the one with the door usually closed on most Sunday afternoons! (lol!)

If we had to pee, we had to use the bathroom in my father's workshop beside the barn. But as teenagers, we were usually gone all day anyway. If we came home to find her novel lying faced-up on the coffee table, it was understood by all concerned that it would be in our best interest if we went back to our boyfriend's house for a few more hours... 🙈🙉🙊

During those times of exploration between 14 and 16 years of age, oral sex is most definitely condoned and is actually encouraged as a means to DIS-courage the attraction of intercourse. Our cultural practice recognizes the need for 'sexual release' between two teenagers and if an alternative is not provided to the teenagers while condoned by the supervising parent, Nature will undoubtedly prevail and the family will have an unwanted pregnancy on their hands. Needless to say, oral sex was discussed very frequently in our home as we each came into that 14th year and anytime oral sex was our topic of mutual interest between mother and daughters, it was always presumed by my mother that oral sex would be occurring with boyfriends of ours who were un-circumcised. Therefore, any discussion at the kitchen table about oral sex was always very inclusive of the presence of a foreskin.

@swirlie: When I learned about oral sex in the 1960s, I instantly realised that if taking a man's tool in her mouth is an option, then high school or college girls get pregnant at a very awkward time only because they are ignorant of oral, or too prudish to assert "I will suck you off, but you have to stop trying to get into my panties". 1-2 people have told me that the more sophisticated girls of my generation were fairly dutiful about using handjobs to defuse the horniness of their dates.

A problem before the 1970s was that young unmarried women felt much less guilt if they could rationalise their sex as resulting from "being carried away." This rationalisation was nonsensical if they had condoms in their purses, or if they were knowledgeable about fellatio. So they didn't pack condoms, and closed their minds to the fellatio option. This mindset struck me as madly stupid, and my very religious mother came to the same conclusion: to not use condoms, or to be too embarrassed to say that the vagina was off limits, was not less wrong, but doubly wrong.

@consa01:

What an amazing story! I thought that young women of the 60's teen-generation, would be totally adept at all various options of sex available to mankind. I guess the truth is, those girls back then were no more adept at sexual options than most young women are today, hence the high percentage of teen pregnancies in North America (Canada/USA).

I hear what you say about religion and condoms. Like you say, "madly stupid"!

Interesting what you say about girls of your generation being fairly dutiful about using hand jobs to defuse the horniness of their dates! (lol!). To me, that was always a waste, therefore, I specifically never practiced hand jobs on guys I would date. The way I did it, there was never anything to clean up! At least with my finely honed Scandinavian-taught method, he and I both got something highly desirous out of it at his moment of truth! (or preferably, moment(s) of truth...!).

I swear that stuff is like Oxycontin... try it just once and a girl is hooked for life! 😌