Hi doc. Welcome to LPSG. Sorry to hear of your experience. Who bamboozled you into getting cut or how were you bamboozled into getting cut?
Do you think your foreskin is too long????
- Thread starter petetown
- Start date
siroliver19
Worshipped Member
OK, I understand your issue now. I dated a guy once with the same problem. Phimosis occurs in about 1% of uncut adult men. I would recommend you see your doctor. A prescription-only steroid cream (betamethasone) used for 4-6 weeks has an 87% success rate in treating adult phimosis (the rate is even higher when combined with stretching exercises). If your doctor is not informed about this treatment, ask for a referral to a urologist. The sensitivity of the glans should resolve with time once the phimosis is gone (it is also possible that the sensitivity is caused by inflammation or infection of the glans), something your doctor could treat. Preputioplasty (a/k/a "dorsal slit") and circumcision should only be performed if your phimosis doesn't resolve with medical treatment.
Best of luck, whatwillyou_see.
After my circumcision, the sensitivity of my glans dropped dramatically; too much, in fact. Blow jobs have never felt the same. There are ways to increase the sensitivity of the glans in circumcised men, through foreskin restoration techniques (http://tlctugger.com/) or the Senslip product (http://www.senslip.com/), but they require more dedication than I can muster.
In response to dxjnorto: I had myself circumcised essentially due to peer pressure: I saw only one other kid that had a foreskin growing up. At that age (17), it made me self-conscious in the locker room and I just wanted to look like all the other guys. Stupid reasons in retrospect, but what's done is done. Perhaps to compensate, I now only date uncut guys (!).
Brief history lesson: The US medical community has had a long-standing hostile attitude towards foreskin. Circumcision was popularized in the late 1800s as a way to prevent masturbation in boys. Rates further increased during and after the World War II (many uncut soldiers were ordered to be circumcised for "hygienic" reasons). The circumcision rate here peaked in the mid 1960's at nearly 90%. The American Academy of Pediatrics came out against routine infant circumcision in 1999 (http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;103/3/686). Most recent estimates put the current circumcision rate at about 55%. There is pressure in some quarters to again advocate for routine infant circumcision based on 2007 medical studies performed in Africa that showed a lower rate of HIV infection among circumcised men (some public health authorities have recommended that uncut adult men at high risk for HIV get circumcised as a preventative strategy). See http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/circumcision.htm. I've always felt that circumcision was a permanent solution to a non-existent problem, but it's too soon to tell whether that research will change circumcision practices either within or outside the US.
Yeah, hopefully IntactAmerica.org will nix the Centers for Disease Control's Routine Infant Circumcision penchant. Shows how research can be skewed to meet the needs of a highly educated subgroup with a mandate to publish, and individual highly suspect motives that are really anyone's guess.
The baby is the patient. Unless a baby's mother is HIV+ the baby's risk is absolute zero. I am sickened by the hubris of the medical community on this. It is very similar to wrongheaded turn-of-the-century efforts to eradicate syphilis (and other STDs) with that whole circumcision/hygiene conflation.
The U.S. is the longest running circ/HIV experiment on record. Look at the numbers. All non-circumcising cultures have lower rates of HIV infection than the United States. Too many factors at play. And in fact many of these studies are metastudies that confound factors from many cultures. Also, Orange Farm and other studies in Uganda are African. May have little to nothing in common with U.S. population.
Hey thought I'd post an update. I've been doing a lot of intense stretching and pulling and can successfully pull the skin past the head, only when I'm soft or semi-hard, however. I also have noticed that over time the sensitivity of the head is decreasing, but the some issues remaining is the dryness and somewhat present when I pull it down and the excess skin that collects right underneath the head, comparable to a fleshy turtle neck -.-... Anyways I'll keep working at it :3
Sounds good. Back off on the intensity a bit though. You only started four days ago. Take some time -- enjoy the process. :bandit: People with giant earlobe piercings don't get there in a week -- your foreskin is much more elastic than earlobes, but also more sensitive.
D_Shermie Shtoinkle
Experimental Member
Yeah, that's a gift cjfp. I'd hate to see you ruin it.
Always nice when you pop in too Maxime. Living proof that a big head and foreskin can coexist.
Always nice when you pop in too Maxime. Living proof that a big head and foreskin can coexist.
brad290
Experimental Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2006
- Posts
- 17
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 4
- Points
- 223
- Location
- Melbourne (Victoria, Australia)
- Sexuality
- No Response
- Gender
- Male
That dryness is likely a yeast infection, which could easily be causing the phimosis in the first place. It's worth a tube of monistat to find out.
