I got circumcised today

[darkbond007]

Nobody claims that foreskin restoration is replacing what was taken. What it does is grow enough new slack skin so it can do many of the functions of the original equipment. It protects the glans and mucosa, it affords an exquisite frictionless gliding action for manipulation and intercourse, and it lets the nerve endings respond to the natural bending and straightening the shaft skin undergoes as it rolls around.

For a lot of guys - like the Portugese guy I heard from this morning - it gives a chance to fit in and look normal amongst peers. For one guy I know, it gave enough slack so he could get recircumcised and get rid of hideous bulgy scars and stitch tunnels he had lived with his whole life. People have their reasons. Just because you can't be bothered, you seem intent on delegitimizing the whole process.

Restoring's not hard or painful, it just takes patience. How does that make someone crazy for doing it? Sex for my wife and me is world's better since I restored, but you know there are whole forums dedicated to this topic where you can hear from as many guys as you like (who have nothing to sell). Why are you so bent out of shape about it?

The same argument can be made for the guys who decide to be circumcised as adults. Sex is better for me now. I didn't do it to fit in I did it out of medical necessity. There are whole forums dedicated to adult circumcision too. So with a regrown foreskin all of a sudden your nerves are starting to respond? I'm sorry nerves dont work that way. It's all in your head.

I'm glad you feel better about yourself but just like you have an argument there is an argument for the other side too and hopefully you can simply respect that instead of running into every thread where a guy may want to go and get circumcised and frightening him off with your own issues.

 

[justcurious80]

You guys all need to calm down... this is why circumcision topics are frowned upon on lpsg. there are always two sides of the debate, always.... For some people with medical reasons ,circumcision is the answer and i understand that. Its the Routine Infant circumcision that i don't agree with.

please play nice everyone...or try to at least.....

 

[B_Bonky]

Hey you all can do whatever you like to your dicks. Pierce 'em, pull the skin around, stretch this and that, hang weights from 'em. I don't really care. I just care when people all get together and start pretending things are what they're not, to make themselves feel better. That strikes me as something you should be discussing with a shrink, and I feel like I should point that out in the hopes that one guy will stop before he hurts himself.

So to begin with, let's all remember that it's not "restoration" of the foreskin.. it's "substitution." The skin on the shaft of your penis pulled forward really really far ain't the same thing. I wouldn't even put the word "foreskin" in there -- I'd call it something like "penile alteration".. or something.. I'm sure someone can come up with a better term. "Penile skin stretching" "penile shaft modification" whatever.

But "foreskin restoration" is doubly wrong: there's no restoration, there's no foreskin.

 

[deleted15807]

None of it is peer-reviewed. Here is a definition of what is a peer review.

Peer review - Wiped, the free encyclopedia

BINGO

What TLC fails to realize is posting outdated and ill informed references to an INTERNET article does not mean your article is peer reviewed. Heck, ANYTHING posted on circumcision is open to interpretation and quite frankly cant be take as a fact.
A peer reviewed document is something you can carry to court and actually win any case on. I would like for him to go and sue the doctor that cut him using the links he has presented.

BINGO. The internet has allowed vast amounts of disinformation to be presented as fact. And The Brigade has exploited that weakness to the nth degree. Very little if any of their 'facts' are actually published in print and backed up via many sources in print. It's all HTML 'facts'. Laughable really.

This is why I say that it's your mind, not your dick, that has the problem. It's your ex-post facto feeling of powerlessness that bothers you, not the loss of a flap of skin.

The question any decent psychotherapist would ask is: what event triggered these feelings? Probably something in young adulthood..

BINGO. Something happened.

Wow, a psychotherapist would have a field day with you!

In that one sentence I see both sincere delusions of grandeur as well as hatred and distrust of "intellectuals." Very interesting!

You must believe in several conspiracy theories as well, right? Seriously, not a joke. I know a guy just like you and he thinks "the system" is out to get all the "real" people (like himself.)

BINGO

You hit the nail right on the head. It is very much a mental issue with this issue. Mainly because guys who were cut as adults come on boards like this and always say things like, "Guys, you know what, youre really not missing anything, I've felt all both and all is well!"

Yet they still don't want to believe.

BINGO. If this argument is proven false that there is less satisfaction which of course it is then the entire case literally falls apart. And that's why it is clung to with such tenacity. And it's why The Brigade doesn't go to the threads where once uncut guys that are now cut say 'No problem dude'. Gotta stay away from those threads.

 

[darkbond007]

Hey you all can do whatever you like to your dicks. Pierce 'em, pull the skin around, stretch this and that, hang weights from 'em. I don't really care. I just care when people all get together and start pretending things are what they're not, to make themselves feel better. That strikes me as something you should be discussing with a shrink, and I feel like I should point that out in the hopes that one guy will stop before he hurts himself.

So to begin with, let's all remember that it's not "restoration" of the foreskin.. it's "substitution." The skin on the shaft of your penis pulled forward really really far ain't the same thing. I wouldn't even put the word "foreskin" in there -- I'd call it something like "penile alteration".. or something.. I'm sure someone can come up with a better term. "Penile skin stretching" "penile shaft modification" whatever.

But "foreskin restoration" is doubly wrong: there's no restoration, there's no foreskin.

Very well put.

 

[TLCTugger]

all male mammals DO NOT have foreskins.

Seriously? You have a counter-example?

I used to hear "all mammals except bats" have foreskins, but that got shot down. Every bat I have seen in person or in a photo had a prepuce like a dog's or hamster's.

I guess I won't say all mammals have foreskins, but I would bet some money that it's true, as nobody has ever produced a counter-example for me.

-Ron

 

[TLCTugger]

http://www.lpsg.org/116001-circumcision-as-an-adult.html

You seem to be on TOP of every circumcision thread but you missed this one.

If you had a point maybe you could state it more clearly.

-Ron

 

[TLCTugger]

What TLC fails to realize is posting outdated and ill informed references to an internet article does not mean your article is peer reviewed.

ALL peer-reviewed. Published AFTER REVIEW in scholarly journals such as British Journal of Urology.

You can lie a lie over and over, but that doesn't make it true. Sooner or later even your friends will stop believing.

 

[crossy]

Kitti's Hog-nose Bat (alright google it) is the only male mammal without a foreskin.

 

[karldergrosse]

Everybody: Who (except zoologists, maybe) really cares in this context how many mammals do or don't have foreskins? Human beings do, and they're the ones we're talking about.

Bonky: What's in a name...? Restored covering of the glans is far better than nothing. Check out the advantages and listen to the praises of many, many restored men.

Sargon: Of course there are men who chose circumcision for themselves--therefore most of them, I would suppose, are satisfied with it (never mind whether they may have other problems as well). After all, if we choose, we can live in a world of comforting illusion! And nobody cares what an individual chooses for himself--it's his inalienable right...and welcome to it. But it's the abomination of Routine Infant Circumcision that must be abolished. Who can object to letting each individual make his own choice when he is mature enough to do so? Why do you think that an irrevocable, lifelong decision should be made for a helpless infant by know-it-all "adults"? Haven't grown-ups already made a sufficient mess of the world...?

Tugger: Sargon has no point to offer (Link 147)--he's instead indulging in an immature ad hominem attack.

 

[darkbond007]

ALL peer-reviewed. Published AFTER REVIEW in scholarly journals such as British Journal of Urology.

You can lie a lie over and over, but that doesn't make it true. Sooner or later even your friends will stop believing.

British Journal of Urology has 5 articles on circumcision, all of which are of the historical and how to actually perform a circumcision variety, and zero on foreskin. Feed your lies to someone who doesn't know any better.

I can understand if you have an opinion but stop feeding your opinion as a fact to this board. It's downright irresponsible.

 

[darkbond007]

Bonky: What's in a name...? Restored covering of the glans is far better than nothing. Check out the advantages and listen to the praises of many, many restored men.

Men who are circumcised as adults sing its praises as well. But it seems like that falls on deaf ears. However it seems like there is an argument where you guys actually tell people to restore their foreskin and all will be well with the world. Again that goes against what someone who had an adult circumcision did.

Here is how I see it.

Men left in tact from birth - they sing the praises of their penis
Men cut at birth - they sing the praises of their penis
Men cut as adults - sing the praises of their penis

Men cut at birth but read to much on the internet and need to blame something - mad at the world
Men cut at birth but trying to substitute - sing praises of their penis and still mad at the world

Sargon: Of course there are men who chose circumcision for themselves--therefore most of them, I would suppose, are satisfied with it (never mind whether they may have other problems as well). After all, if we choose, we can live in a world of comforting illusion! And nobody cares what an individual chooses for himself--it's his inalienable right...and welcome to it. But it's the abomination of Routine Infant Circumcision that must be abolished. Who can object to letting each individual make his own choice when he is mature enough to do so? Why do you think that an irrevocable, lifelong decision should be made for a helpless infant by know-it-all "adults"? Haven't grown-ups already made a sufficient mess of the world...?

That is kind of conflicting with your previous argument. You speak of the praising and advantage taking of restored men but talk about an irrevocable lifelong decision. Which is it?

Again this goes back to being psychological. If no one ever told you that something may be wrong how would you know? Use myself as an example. I lived 24 years not knowing about phimosis. Up to that point I thought I had a perfectly working penis and nothing was wrong with it. Thanks to a place much like this I got great feedback, some saying stretch it, other recommended steroids, other recommended circumcision. I did my research. Went to a doctor and two urologist, spent like half a year just trying to make up my mind and when I did and had my operation I was happy.

It all boils down to this: Being happy with your penis. If you want it cut, then have it cut. If you want to restore then have it restored. I'm really not going to argue RIC because I think that's an entirely separate argument with so much parameters to it my head hurts even thinking of how I would start it. I still havent made up my mind whether I would have my son(s) RIC. I am kind of leaning towards the option of posing it to them before puberty and allowing them to make the decision but who knows, my future wife and I will talk it out, do the research and weigh the options.

RIC argument has weight but it has no backing. It always comes down to cultural preference. All muslims still circumcise. The majority of jews do as well. Other cultures around the world have it interspersed within their fabric. If there was data out there that was peer reviewed (ie Kinsey Report) then it would spread like wildfire.

I should have found these boards years ago. You guys are a spirited bunch =)

 

[TLCTugger]

So with a regrown foreskin all of a sudden your nerves are starting to respond? I'm sorry nerves don't work that way. It's all in your head. .

I wish it was as easy as adjusting somebody's head.

Restoring gives radically different feelings. Among them:

- the shaft can now be frictionlessly kneaded by the slinking of the skin, to prod some sense sites deep within the shaft near the glans and elsewhere. I never knew this was possible before I restored. I suppose with enough lube I might have discovered the same thing.

- the mucosal skin just below the glans down to the scar has a sort of ticklish "itch" that just sparkles during intercourse or oral. The area was dry and basically numb before.

- the corona and frenular area are just a lot more ticklish now that they are covered all the time. Some have said it's due to "dekeratinization" and others have said there's no such thing. All I know is I feel a lot more now. It's like the nerve endings are closer to the surface, and surface is more supple and delicate so it tracks better with whatever it's touching. It's like going from wearing 3 thick condoms to a single ultra-shear one. Anybody can experience the same change by weaing a band-aid continuously for several days on any part of their body. When you take it off, the part that had been covered is very sensitive and ticklish.

- the skin at the pucker of the prepuce is very ticklish to tongue flicking when it is bunched up. Since I didn't have enough to bunch up before, I never felt this sensation.

- the inner foreskin is delightfully aware of a tongue plunged in between the glans and foreskin and swirled around (with skin drawn forward over the glans). Since I didn't have enough slack before for this to happen, I never felt this sensation.

- the shaft skin that has spent its whole day puckered in front of the glans gives off a wild sensation upon the onset of an erection. It's like the skin crackles inside as it is forced to stretch wide enough to clear the glans and retract past it. This is brief and I really only notice it for the first couple minutes of an erotic encounter, but that's OK. If it kept up I'd probably come too fast. I imagine this might be akin to what it feels like to have a vagina stretched out. I can only guess about that of course.

- the shaft skin that rolls up and down the shaft gives off a new feeling as it rolls over on itself from inner to outer and back. Since I never had enough slack before to feel the skin tightly rolling like this during arousal I never felt this sensation before.

- with the slack skin that easily covers my glans during arousal, my wife can rub my glans through the skin before intercourse while I'm licking her and there is ZERO risk of her rubbing me to the point of numbness. Before the dry friction would really have a negative impact on the intercourse that followed.

- after my wife climaxes once during intercourse her vaginal chemistry seems to change to where there is suddenly much more friction. Not a LOT more; like the difference between lube that's water and lube that's oil. At that time, I often feel my penis move inside my sheath of skin only, with ZERO friction between me and her vaginal walls. She LOVES this, because she says at that moment she would be too sensitive for any friction. Because I never had slack before, she was never able to enjoy this plushed filled-up frictionless massage feeling between orgasms before.
- - - - -
Sex wasn't torture before. At age 38 my wife and I would bone for like 45 minutes or an hour. She would come about 5 times and if I wanted to finish I needed to REALLY concentrate and she needed to break out the dirty talk and the stars needed to align. But she would be rubbed raw and then want to take several days off.

She never did succeed in finishing me orally before I restored.

Now whenever she's had enough of intercourse I just let go and finish as she comes again with me. But the whole ride is so fulfilling, I'm no rush to get to a big finish. We really connect, and bone more often than ever.

Sex is very much better since restoration for physical reasons. We're both having the best sex of our lives.

-Ron

 

[TLCTugger]

British Journal of Urology has 5 articles on circumcision, all of which are of the historical and how to actually perform a circumcision variety, and zero on foreskin. Feed your lies to someone who doesn't know any better.

May you someday attain competence at searching British Journal of Urology archives.

The Sorrells study was peer-reviewed then accepted for publication in 2006. Who the fuck has time for your nonsense? Just give it a rest, liar.

-Ron

 

[darkbond007]

I wish it was as easy as adjusting somebody's head.

Restoring gives radically different feelings. Among them:

- the shaft can now be frictionlessly kneaded by the slinking of the skin, to prod some sense sites deep within the shaft near the glans and elsewhere. I never knew this was possible before I restored. I suppose with enough lube I might have discovered the same thing.

I have sensitivity there.

- the mucosal skin just below the glans down to the scar has a sort of ticklish "itch" that just sparkles during intercourse or oral. The area was dry and basically numb before.

I have sensitivity there, it is the most sensitive part actually.

- the corona and frenular area are just a lot more ticklish now that they are covered all the time. Some have said it's due to "dekeratinization" and others have said there's no such thing. All I know is I feel a lot more now. It's like the nerve endings are closer to the surface, and surface is more supple and delicate so it tracks better with whatever it's touching. It's like going from wearing 3 thick condoms to a single ultra-shear one. Anybody can experience the same change by weaing a band-aid continuously for several days on any part of their body. When you take it off, the part that had been covered is very sensitive and ticklish.

I'm not concerned with being ticklish, I want it to feel good and my corona and frenulum actually give me more pleasure than when I was circumcised mainly because these areas were not exposed.

- the skin at the pucker of the prepuce is very ticklish to tongue flicking when it is bunched up. Since I didn't have enough to bunch up before, I never felt this sensation.

I never had this sensation when I was uncut

- the inner foreskin is delightfully aware of a tongue plunged in between the glans and foreskin and swirled around (with skin drawn forward over the glans). Since I didn't have enough slack before for this to happen, I never felt this sensation.

When I was uncut I didnt have that slack. At least you had the choice to regrow and be able to do that. Though I think you still misuse the term inner foreskin here.

- the shaft skin that has spent its whole day puckered in front of the glans gives off a wild sensation upon the onset of an erection. It's like the skin crackles inside as it is forced to stretch wide enough to clear the glans and retract past it. This is brief and I really only notice it for the first couple minutes of an erotic encounter, but that's OK. If it kept up I'd probably come too fast. I imagine this might be akin to what it feels like to have a vagina stretched out. I can only guess about that of course.

I too feel a wild sensation when I get to full erection. When my scar stretches its unbelievable.

- the shaft skin that rolls up and down the shaft gives off a new feeling as it rolls over on itself from inner to outer and back. Since I never had enough slack before to feel the skin tightly rolling like this during arousal I never felt this sensation before.

I didnt have this with my foreskin. Damn phimosis.

- with the slack skin that easily covers my glans during arousal, my wife can rub my glans through the skin before intercourse while I'm licking her and there is ZERO risk of her rubbing me to the point of numbness. Before the dry friction would really have a negative impact on the intercourse that followed.

My girlfriend rubs me. Ive never experienced this numbness.

- after my wife climaxes once during intercourse her vaginal chemistry seems to change to where there is suddenly much more friction. Not a LOT more; like the difference between lube that's water and lube that's oil. At that time, I often feel my penis move inside my sheath of skin only, with ZERO friction between me and her vaginal walls. She LOVES this, because she says at that moment she would be too sensitive for any friction. Because I never had slack before, she was never able to enjoy this plushed filled-up frictionless massage feeling between orgasms before.

Personal preference of your wife. Some women would go for more friction or just friction alone.

- - - - -
Sex wasn't torture before. At age 38 my wife and I would bone for like 45 minutes or an hour. She would come about 5 times and if I wanted to finish I needed to REALLY concentrate and she needed to break out the dirty talk and the stars needed to align. But she would be rubbed raw and then want to take several days off.

She never did succeed in finishing me orally before I restored.

Now whenever she's had enough of intercourse I just let go and finish as she comes again with me. But the whole ride is so fulfilling, I'm no rush to get to a big finish. We really connect, and bone more often than ever.

Sex is very much better since restoration for physical reasons. We're both having the best sex of our lives.

-Ron

Happy you are having the best sex of your life but again, I must point out. ITS YOU, NOT EVERYONE HAVING THAT SEX. What works for you doesnt work for others. What you are happy with not everyone will be happy with.

May you someday attain competence at searching British Journal of Urology archives.

The Sorrells study was peer-reviewed then accepted for publication in 2006. Who the fuck has time for your nonsense? Just give it a rest, liar.

That test has to do with pressure sensitivity. Sexual sensitivity is different. Basically an uncut man with his skin rolled back will howl when wearing boxers whereas a cut man wont. That's pretty much a given. Trying to apply that to sexual sensitivity is a misapplication of this study.

Now, just to show you how to do research...

Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies

Which CLEARLY states

Adult male circumcision does not adversely affect sexual satisfaction or clinically significant function in men.

 

[deleted15807]

May you someday attain competence at searching British Journal of Urology archives.

The Sorrells study was peer-reviewed then accepted for publication in 2006. Who the fuck has time for your nonsense? Just give it a rest, liar.

-Ron

First the Sorrels study has not been repeated anywhere. Second the Sorrels study does not prove uncircumcised men enjoy sex more than circumcised men. Sexual satisfaction happens in the brain and not in your mythical nerves that supposedly were chopped away. Third Sorrels has to be the most biased researcher in the field. As he was conducting the test he probably was restoring at the same time as we know he is a restorer himself. Nice.

Why am I discussing this with someone who calls himself TLCTugger? I get it now. You own the website http://www.tlctugger.com/. Pure snake oil.

 

[darkbond007]

First the Sorrels study has not been repeated anywhere. Second the Sorrels study does not prove uncircumcised men enjoy sex more than circumcised men. Sexual satisfaction happens in the brain and not in your mythical nerves that supposedly were chopped away. Third Sorrels has to be the most biased researcher in the field. As he was conducting the test he probably was restoring at the same time as we know he is a restorer himself. Nice.

Why am I discussing this with someone who calls himself TLCTugger? I get it now. You own the website http://www.tlctugger.com/. What a hack.

No need to argue what you said is just what I said and I retorted with an article from the same site he uses that refutes his argument:

Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies

I might as well put that down as my sig, cause there is no need to go further with this argument.

 

[TLCTugger]

an article from the same site he uses that refutes his argument:
Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies

I would never quote that horse-shit study. It was done by the same people fleecing Bill Gates out funding for further studies into HIV and circ.

The study didn't measure anything. They asked a bunch of self-elected circ volunteers if sex was good. They all pretty much said yes both before and after. The guys they didn't cut actually reported HIGHER satisfaction but since it was a statistical tie, they declared it a success and moved on to the next funded project.

Any other study of sexual satisfaction tops out at around 90% of people saying they have good sex. These guys got numbers around 99% by not measuring.

They didn't measure anything. Sorrells measured the penis all over including the foreskin, and in 2 years, nobody has replicated their method with contradictory findings. You ask for studies, then you say studies don't matter. When I say studies don't matter, you let out the venom.

You're irrational. I have no idea why you feel so attacked. I never questioned an adult's right to choose as you seem to have chosen. I'll say again not all such adults are making an informed choice free of social coercion, and very few reports of everything being A-OK afterward are after a sufficiently long interval to let things calm down after the glans is feshly denuded.

A guy called me for my help today. He was cut at age 45 and says it's the worst mistake of his life. People's anecdotes will vary. None of it justifies cutting infants, which is the BS that was flying when I dropped in here.

-Ron

 

[darkbond007]

I would never quote that horse-shit study. It was done by the same people fleecing Bill Gates out funding for further studies into HIV and circ.

The study didn't measure anything. They asked a bunch of self-elected circ volunteers if sex was good. They all pretty much said yes both before and after. The guys they didn't cut actually reported HIGHER satisfaction but since it was a statistical tie, they declared it a success and moved on to the next funded project.

Any other study of sexual satisfaction tops out at around 90% of people saying they have good sex. These guys got numbers around 99% by not measuring.

They didn't measure anything. Sorrells measured the penis all over including the foreskin, and in 2 years, nobody has replicated their method with contradictory findings. You ask for studies, then you say studies don't matter. When I say studies don't matter, you let out the venom.

You're irrational. I have no idea why you feel so attacked. I never questioned an adult's right to choose as you seem to have chosen. I'll say again not all such adults are making an informed choice free of social coercion, and very few reports of everything being A-OK afterward are after a sufficiently long interval to let things calm down after the glans is feshly denuded.

A guy called me for my help today. He was cut at age 45 and says it's the worst mistake of his life. People's anecdotes will vary. None of it justifies cutting infants, which is the BS that was flying when I dropped in here.

-Ron

So...

You give a study, which is misplaced because the study was not done on sexually aroused males. I provide one that is and you retort with some BS. My conclusion clearly states that there is no disadvantage in adult circumcision and you call me irrational?

The study was not out to prove that there were higher satisfaction levels. It was out to prove that there is no difference. That it is a tie. Which it CLEARLY stated. No one has replicated Sorells because it tells us nothing. you are talking about non sexually aroused men!

This is not enough for you though.

Oh yeah right a guy called you out of the blue today to talk about restoring? And you fed him a bunch of lies right? Instead of giving him both sides of the story and letting him choose? Kind of hypocritical from someone who was RICed

 

[horneyoldguy]

Sorry to hear you had to have the circumcision done. I had mine done as a baby, no choice. But if I had been given the choice i would have opted to be left intact and only have it removed if it was medically necessary.

What is interesting is my father was uncut but he listened to the doctors of the day as my wife and I did with our sons ahd had them cut. Personally I think the medical profession should leave us males alone unless it is necessary to remove the foreskin for medical reasons.