Ciircumcision & ball & bag size.

[Hoss]

Is it true that circumcising leads to a larger bag because the skin isn't made to decide between shaft covering and ball covering? and since the bag is bigger does it mean the balls will be bigger as well because there's more space?

 

[B_stanmarsh14]

It's possible, but in all truth, it would not make that much of a difference.

 

[D_CountdeGrandePinja]

don't know - love that I was spared the knife - thanks Mom & Dad.

 

[prepstudinsc]

What does circumcision have to do with how big a person's balls are? That's purely genetics.

 

[Charles Finn]

well I am cut and have large hanging balls I do wish I were spared the knife

 

[maxcok]

..

 

[tight]

The answer to your question is, no. Circumscision has nothing to do with your scrotum. Now if you want a larger scrotum and bigger balls then you have to stretch the scrotum and pump your balls. The increased blood flow from pumping will make your balls larger over time. The skin of the scrotum is very lastic, but to maintain it you will have to keep stretching it out.

 

[Industrialsize]

no

 

[D_Miranda_Wrights]

Is it true that circumcising leads to a larger bag because the skin isn't made to decide between shaft covering and ball covering?

No. Even if the penile shaft skin had a significant connection to the scrotal skin, removing skin from your penis does not "free up" skin to go some place else...it just removes skin. Having less skin means there's less skin to go around, not that the skin you have is less confused (or whatever.)

I suppose you could theoretically have a circumcision so restrictive that it pulled the scrotum upwards, but it would be safe to call that a f@$k-up, and the opposite is just anatomically impossible.

and since the bag is bigger does it mean the balls will be bigger as well because there's more space?

No...testicles aren't goldfish.

 

[B_Nick8]

You can't possibly be asking this question seriously.

 

[SR_Pepe Le Pube]

yes. and when you cut your hands off your feet magically grow bigger.

 

[mandoman]

Hoss, what are you doing, stirring up a hornet's nest.
Of course, there's no truth to it.

 

[Yknarfy]

Well I'm uncut and certainly have always had plenty of spare skin to play with. It allows my nuts to hang low and my foreskin to hang long - great fun that I could not have if I'd been cut!
See my gallery pics and you will easily see how the excess foreskin may be used in my scrotum and vice versa.

Franky

 

[maxcok]

Having less skin means there's less skin to go around, not that the skin you have is less confused (or whatever.)

Well to be accurate and fair, he didn't say the skin was confused, only that it was indecisive. ;-)

. . . because the skin isn't made to decide between shaft covering and ball covering . . .

No...testicles aren't goldfish.

LOLOL.

 

[Krusader]

I think the skin is very stretchy the last time i checked, nothing to do with whether you are intact or not

 

[Snozzle]

Is it true that circumcising leads to a larger bag because the skin isn't made to decide between shaft covering and ball covering?

How would it decide? Toss a coin? Fortunately, skin not being noted for its intelligence, it isn't offered a chance to decide anything. Where it is under tension, it will grow (hence foreskin restoration), but scrotal skin grows extra because it has the function of cooling the testicles.

and since the bag is bigger does it mean the balls will be bigger as well because there's more space?

I love the "goldfish" answer.