Retracted Foreskin
Andi
I am uncircd and would like to feel what it is like to be circd, to have
a constantly bare glans over a longer period. So I would like to waer my
foreskin constantly retracted. I tried some taping, as shown on
circlist.org, but it didnt work well and I hate to have those extra
things and tapes on my cock.
Has anyone experienced this kind of thing? How long does it take to keep
the foreskin in retracted position without any help and devices? Any
hints are welcome.
Thanks
Andi
George Hill
----- Original Message -----
From: Andi <NOS...@gmx.net>
Newsgroups: alt.circumcision
Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 6:28 AM
Subject: Retracted Foreskin
: Hi,
Dear Andi:
The foreskin has protective effects for the glans penis. The oils in the
sub-preputial moisture keep the glans lubricated. The foreskin protects the
glans from friction. The sub-preputial moisture contains lysozyme, a
natural enzyme that breaks down the cell walls of bacteria and kills them.
The foreskin is a good thing. I do not think wearing it retracted is a good
idea.
Here is an article about the foreskin that you may find interesting if it is
not too technical for you.
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/STD/fleiss3/
george
Leif Thompson
only would you have to hold the skin back but you would have to simulate
the loss of sensation from your forskin somehow. You would have to stop
the sensory imput of about half of the distal skin (mucosal and haired
skin) on your shaft.
Leif Thompson
Debbie
-Kyra [relurk]
Dave
erection, while you have a erection you can retract, and it will
normally stay that way, or most of the way. If you have a long foreskin,
retraction without the use of "helpers" is nearly impossible. In fact
it's very difficult to keep full retraction if your foreskin covers the
entire glans while soft. If you keep it retracted for longer and longer
periods, it will eventually be trained to stay that way.
My suggestion, if you really want to try retraction, use the taping
method suggested by circlist if you can get it to work, or devise your
own. That is probably what will work best for you, once you've retracted
for a long time(6months-1year) it has a good chance of staying back on
it's own at all times.
My personal views. I am in favor of retraction. Most men, I would
suspect, are curious about what it is like to be circ'ed and vice versa.
This is a relativly safe thing to do, and if you don't like it the
solution is to simply stop keeping it retracted. I do suggest stopping
if you notice a decrease in sensation, as this could become permanent.
Permanent sensation loss may in some cases be good at first, but you
will probably miss it after a while, and if you do, you won't get it
back. So while retraction for a relativly short period of time is safe,
you might want to avoid full time retraction unless you are seriously
considering getting circumcised. In which case you will always be
retracted.
- Dave
...And yes I'm still alive folks, just been busy.
Andi wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am uncircd and would like to feel what it is like to be circd, to have
> a constantly bare glans over a longer period. So I would like to waer my
> foreskin constantly retracted. I tried some taping, as shown on
> circlist.org, but it didnt work well and I hate to have those extra
> things and tapes on my cock.
>
> Has anyone experienced this kind of thing? How long does it take to keep
> the foreskin in retracted position without any help and devices? Any
> hints are welcome.
>
> Thanks
> Andi
coonie
Andi <NOS...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am uncircd and would like to feel what it is like to be circd, to
have
> a constantly bare glans over a longer period. So I would like to waer
my
> foreskin constantly retracted. I tried some taping, as shown on
> circlist.org, but it didnt work well and I hate to have those extra
> things and tapes on my cock.
>
> Has anyone experienced this kind of thing? How long does it take to
keep
> the foreskin in retracted position without any help and devices? Any
> hints are welcome.
>
> Thanks
> Andi
>
Depends on how old you are, how long your foreskin is.. etc..
But, in general the foreskin, if not excessively long, can be trained to
stay more or less retracted. Probably six months to a year.. the process
takes place very gradually. So gradually if you don't fret over it,
you'll hardly notice it happening. You'll simply arrive.
--
Circumcision is not a debate, it is a battle for a boy
to remain genitally whole.
http://homestead.deja.com/user.coontail/nocir1.html
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Paul Hagen
> Hi,
>
> I am uncircd and would like to feel what it is like to be circd, to have
> a constantly bare glans over a longer period. So I would like to waer my
> foreskin constantly retracted. I tried some taping, as shown on
> circlist.org, but it didnt work well and I hate to have those extra
> things and tapes on my cock.
>
> Has anyone experienced this kind of thing? How long does it take to keep
> the foreskin in retracted position without any help and devices? Any
> hints are welcome.
Every foreskin is different. I've seen posts from guys who say they've
been able to "train" their foreskins to stay retracted when flaccid.* I've
also seen posts from guys whose foreskins cannot be trained to stay back
when flaccid. The foreskins that can stay retracted have an opening
(preputial orifice) that's tight enough to "click into" the coronal sulcus
(sort of like a rubber band) and hold the rest of the skin back until the
foreskin is manually drawn forward with enough force to "pop" the "rubber
band" out of the groove. If your foreskin keeps rolling forward on its own
when you're flaccid, it's totally normal and healthy, but I think it's
highly unlikely that you'll ever be able to train it to stay back.
*Digression: When I was a senior in high school (Class of '64), we had a
male math teacher who was was interested in the circ status of some of us
guys. We found this out over time when someone would mention that Mr. X
had just had an explicit "sex talk" with him, and other guys would chime
in that Mr. X had had a similar talk with them. Seems he always asked if
the guy was circ'd (which we all were). He always seemed pleased about
that, and always mentioned that he'd had his own sons circ'd, but never
mentioned his own circ status. Aside from his "sex talks" (which we
thought were weird), he was a decent and supportive guy. We all liked him.
About 30 years after graduation, I bumped into Mr. X (now in his 70's) at
a symphony concert. He called me a few days later about getting together
for lunch (he must have looked up my number). I figured why not? When we
got together, we did a lot of catching up, but he eventually directed the
conversation to circumcision. As he'd done back in '63-'64, he brought up
the fact that his sons were circ'd, but now he was able to add that his
sons had sons who were also circ'd. He seemed pleased about that. This
time, though, Mr. X volunteered that he still had his foreskin. He said he
wished that he had been circ'd at birth, and that the only reason he never
had himself circ'd as an adult was that he had trained his foreskin to
stay back on its own so "it always looks circumcised." He added that he
had been wearing his foreskin back all the time since I was still in high
school.
I heard Mr. X out and politely excused myself to get to a meeting or
something. I got the uneasy feeling that he wanted to do some mutual "show
and tell." Still a decent enough guy, but apparently still carrying some
baggage about having a foreskin.
NOTE: I did not post this to imply that guys like Mr. X are common! I just
posted it as a reminder that YES, while there are indeed a few circ'd guys
who have issues with their status, there are also a few intact guys who
have issues with THEIR status. The good news is that MOST guys, both
circ'd and intact, DON'T have issues with their status.
Lockdown
Paul Hagen wrote:
Maybe that's why when I go to the pool, there are lots of guys with
their glans showing, but lots of bunched up skin behind... I wonder if
they're just pulling the skin back...
Craig Wagner
prh...@bitstream.net (Paul Hagen) wrote:
> NOTE: I did not post this to imply that guys like Mr. X are common! I just
> posted it as a reminder that YES, while there are indeed a few circ'd guys
> who have issues with their status, there are also a few intact guys who
> have issues with THEIR status. The good news is that MOST guys, both
> circ'd and intact, DON'T have issues with their status.
Good, but irrelevent.
Craig Wagner
lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Maybe that's why when I go to the pool, there are lots of guys with
> their glans showing, but lots of bunched up skin behind... I wonder if
> they're just pulling the skin back...
I don't "get it." This strikes me as vulgar. Any man who goes out of his
way to expose his glans to other men -- just like any woman who goes out
of her way to expose her clitoris to other women -- is behaving crudely,
and would otherwise be refered to as an exhibitionist.
John Pritchard
>
> In article <H3n24.56831$I5.4...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > Maybe that's why when I go to the pool, there are lots of guys with
> > their glans showing, but lots of bunched up skin behind... I wonder if
> > they're just pulling the skin back...
At a causal glance you cannot tell the difference. (And anything beyond
that may earn you a punch on the nose.) It could be either a retracted
foreskin or a loose circumcision. So much for the *locker room syndrome*
theory. You are busily giving advice to all and sundry and you do not
know even the simpliest things about the male anatomy?
The ability of the foreskin to remain retracted depends largely on the
size of the corona relative to the shaft. I honestly cannot see how a
foreskin can be *trained* to remain retracted although perhaps it could
be.
> I don't "get it." This strikes me as vulgar. Any man who goes out of his
> way to expose his glans to other men -- just like any woman who goes out
> of her way to expose her clitoris to other women -- is behaving crudely,
> and would otherwise be refered to as an exhibitionist.
Good God man, this is one of the stupidest things you have ever said. Do
you *honestly* believe that there are no differences between the sexes?
LOL, you guys just never cease to amaze me. A women would have to make a
deliberate and continued (and awkward) effort to fully reveal her
clitoris and as you say be something an *exhibitionist*. A man's penis
just hangs there right out in plain sight.
Are those 50% of the intact who as a result of anatomy permanently show
part or all the glans *vulgar exhibitionists*?.
Craig Wagner
your reading comprehension THAT poor? Read what I said again:
In article <384A22...@escape.ca>, John Pritchard <jpri...@escape.ca> wrote:
> Craig Wagner wrote:
> >
> > In article <H3n24.56831$I5.4...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> > lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe that's why when I go to the pool, there are lots of guys with
> > > their glans showing, but lots of bunched up skin behind... I wonder if
> > > they're just pulling the skin back...
>
> > I don't "get it." This strikes me as vulgar. Any man who goes out of his
> > way to expose his glans to other men -- just like any woman who goes out
> > of her way to expose her clitoris to other women -- is behaving crudely,
> > and would otherwise be refered to as an exhibitionist.
I'll state it again, WITH EMPHASIS for the "hard of reading."
"Any man who GOES OUT OF HIS WAY TO EXPOSE HIS GLANS..."
Anything "hanging out in plain sight" (in an appropriate venue, of course)
is NOT "going out of one's way."
Is there some portion of this which is unclear to you? Or to you
intentionally wish to put words other than those spoken in the mouths of
others?
Lockdown
Craig Wagner wrote:
> In article <H3n24.56831$I5.4...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > Maybe that's why when I go to the pool, there are lots of guys with
> > their glans showing, but lots of bunched up skin behind... I wonder if
> > they're just pulling the skin back...
>
> I don't "get it." This strikes me as vulgar. Any man who goes out of his
> way to expose his glans to other men -- just like any woman who goes out
> of her way to expose her clitoris to other women -- is behaving crudely,
> and would otherwise be refered to as an exhibitionist.
Hmmm.... well I never really though much of it.
And interestingly enough, I saw a kid who was circ'ed the other day, which
surprised me, since the circ rate is so low where I live. I don't know what
reasons
they parents may have had for circ'ing, or maybe he/they came from elsewhere.
Lockdown
John Pritchard wrote:
> Craig Wagner wrote:
> >
> > In article <H3n24.56831$I5.4...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> > lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe that's why when I go to the pool, there are lots of guys with
> > > their glans showing, but lots of bunched up skin behind... I wonder if
> > > they're just pulling the skin back...
>
> At a causal glance you cannot tell the difference. (And anything beyond
> that may earn you a punch on the nose.) It could be either a retracted
> foreskin or a loose circumcision. So much for the *locker room syndrome*
> theory. You are busily giving advice to all and sundry and you do not
> know even the simpliest things about the male anatomy?
That's quite a broad jump to conclusion, dickhead. Yeah, I don't know the
simplest things about male anatomy ... <rolls eyes>
I was thinking it could have been a loose circ, a lot of guys have their
glans fully showing... including lots of chinese guys, for some reason.
Btw, kiss my ass.
>
>
> The ability of the foreskin to remain retracted depends largely on the
> size of the corona relative to the shaft. I honestly cannot see how a
> foreskin can be *trained* to remain retracted although perhaps it could
> be.
That's great.
>
>
> > I don't "get it." This strikes me as vulgar. Any man who goes out of his
> > way to expose his glans to other men -- just like any woman who goes out
> > of her way to expose her clitoris to other women -- is behaving crudely,
> > and would otherwise be refered to as an exhibitionist.
>
Craig Wagner
> deletion
In the words of Church Lady: "How Con-VEN-ient!"
> > I'll state it again, WITH EMPHASIS for the "hard of reading."
> >
> > "Any man who GOES OUT OF HIS WAY TO EXPOSE HIS GLANS..."
> >
> > Anything "hanging out in plain sight" (in an appropriate venue, of course)
> > is NOT "going out of one's way."
> >
> > Is there some portion of this which is unclear to you? Or to you
> > intentionally wish to put words other than those spoken in the mouths of
> > others?
>
> I understood what you meant the first time.
Clearly, you did NOT.
> But I think that the idea
> that if he "GOES OUT OF HIS WAY TO EXPOSE HIS GLANS" is vulgar but if
> he is naturally exposed (short foreskin) he is presumably NOT vulgar is
> even stupider.
There is a huge difference between vulgar behavior and vulgarity. If you'd
like a tutorial re: as it pertains to the discussion (of which you've
deleted much), please ask for it, and I'll make time to oblige (sometime
after Wednesday -- my schedule is full between now and then).
John Pritchard
>
> John, this is one of the most assinine responses you've ever posted. Is
> your reading comprehension THAT poor? Read what I said again:
>
>
> > Craig Wagner wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <H3n24.56831$I5.4...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> > > lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >
>
> I'll state it again, WITH EMPHASIS for the "hard of reading."
>
> "Any man who GOES OUT OF HIS WAY TO EXPOSE HIS GLANS..."
>
> Anything "hanging out in plain sight" (in an appropriate venue, of course)
> is NOT "going out of one's way."
>
> Is there some portion of this which is unclear to you? Or to you
> intentionally wish to put words other than those spoken in the mouths of
> others?
I understood what you meant the first time. But I think that the idea
Lockdown
Centure33 wrote:
> >Subject: Re: Retracted Foreskin
> >From: Lockdown "Lockdown102"@hotmail.com[actually 101]
> >Date: Sun, 05 December 1999 02:25 PM EST
> >Message-id: <u_y24.57651$I5.4...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>
>
> >
> > And interestingly enough, I saw a kid who was circ'ed the other day,
> >which
> >
> >surprised me, since the circ rate is so low where I live. I don't know what
> >reasons
> >they parents may have had for circ'ing, or maybe he/they came from elsewhere.
>
> You got a problem with this kid being circed? You want to ask his parents the
> reason? LOL. As if they would have to answer to you. BTW, I guess you have no
> problem with other kids confronting your parents on your circumcision?
I said I was curious as to the reason. I think he may be the one with the
problem later in life, growing up next to predominantly intact peers.
In His Image
>lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Maybe that's why when I go to the pool, there are lots of guys with
>> their glans showing, but lots of bunched up skin behind... I wonder if
>> they're just pulling the skin back...
Yes, I do wonder why a few guys do that. It can make their dick look so
wrinkley that it suggests some ancient body part has been grafted on from
great-grandpa! Guys who do this must think that it looks attractive, or
interesting, or cute, or something. (I hasten to add that the few I have
noticed are not gay, so it's not an attention-getting come-on.)
>I don't "get it." This strikes me as vulgar. Any man who goes out of his
>way to expose his glans to other men
Well, appearance is precisely the reason that some men with a foreskin
choose to have it removed. (Others have other reasons. I'm not knocking
anyone for choosing as an adult to get themselves circumcised.)
I have read that Japanese men who are uncut often tie their foreskin to
keep it retracted when they are going to be nude in public (specifically,
in the popular Japanese bath houses). Apparently, it is considered rude
to have the glans concealed in such situations. I did wonder why circs
were not almost universal among the Japanese, then, if they need to go
to such efforts to be not considered rude.
Or perhaps they appreciate that the benefits of staying uncut outweigh
that of mere cosmetic appearance even in their society???
-Image
Paul Hagen
lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
> I said I was curious as to the reason. I think he may be the one with the
> problem later in life, growing up next to predominantly intact peers.
WAIT A MINUTE! You have just described "the locker room argument" where
parents are concerned that if their boy's penis is different from the
majority of his peers, he might feel shy/awkward/embarrassed about his
difference in locker room situations - and just about every anti-circer
I've ever seen post on that subject has completely dismissed "the locker
room argument" as complete nonsense. So if this argument is bogus with
regard to intact guys in predominantly circ'd contexts, shouldn't it be
just as bogus for circ'd guys in predominantly intact contexts?
Lockdown
Paul Hagen wrote:
The locker room certainly exists for both cases, but is probably harder
to deal with when people feel that they are "missing something" that everyone
else has, as opposed to the mindset that there are "2 different styles of penis"
that you keep banging on about.
If no one circ'ed, there would be no locker room problems. (and most people
say that thet don't get made fun of for their different penis. How many people
would want to admit to looking at another guy's dick?)
Certainly you could say that "if everyone circ'ed, there would be no issue",
but we know that universal circ is unjustified, and it's your opinion that it's
parental choice, so stopping circ'ing completely is the logical answer.
wadi
Lockdown <"Lockdown102"@hotmail.com [actually 101]> wrote in message
news:jxz54.3937$ri.3...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com...
> so stopping circ'ing completely is the logical answer.
>
Yea right.
4skin logic.
Lockdown
wadi wrote:
as opposed to circ logic, right? Which is to keep on circumcising
at parental whim, or even better, circumcise everyone for the benefits!
John Pritchard
>
> Paul Hagen wrote:
>
> > In article <gHA34.67180$I5.5...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> > lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
>
> The locker room certainly exists for both cases, but is probably harder
> to deal with when people feel that they are "missing something" that everyone
> else has, as opposed to the mindset that there are "2 different styles of penis"
> that you keep banging on about.
> If no one circ'ed, there would be no locker room problems. (and most people
> say that thet don't get made fun of for their different penis. How many people
> would want to admit to looking at another guy's dick?)
> Certainly you could say that "if everyone circ'ed, there would be no issue",
> but we know that universal circ is unjustified, and it's your opinion that it's
But if everyone were circed (and I am not suggesting they should be),
everyone would look much the same.
If no one were circed, everyone would NOT look much the same - there is
a great range of difference among the intact - from a long overhang to
those with a foreskin so short that it cannot be easily distinguished
from the circumcised.
If uniformity is the goal, then universal circumcision is the only way
to go.
Both totally intact and a mix of intact and circumcised will produce
visual differences - and since this characteristic occurs naturally
among the intact, and if we reject universal circumcision, it is a
difference we simply have to learn to accept.
Lockdown
John Pritchard wrote:
> Lockdown wrote:
> >
> > Paul Hagen wrote:
> >
> > > In article <gHA34.67180$I5.5...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> > > lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >
> deletion
> >
> > The locker room certainly exists for both cases, but is probably harder
> > to deal with when people feel that they are "missing something" that everyone
> > else has, as opposed to the mindset that there are "2 different styles of penis"
> > that you keep banging on about.
> > If no one circ'ed, there would be no locker room problems. (and most people
> > say that thet don't get made fun of for their different penis. How many people
> > would want to admit to looking at another guy's dick?)
> > Certainly you could say that "if everyone circ'ed, there would be no issue",
> > but we know that universal circ is unjustified, and it's your opinion that it's
> > parental choice, so stopping circ'ing completely is the logical answer.
>
> But if everyone were circed (and I am not suggesting they should be),
> everyone would look much the same.
>
> If no one were circed, everyone would NOT look much the same - there is
> a great range of difference among the intact - from a long overhang to
> those with a foreskin so short that it cannot be easily distinguished
> from the circumcised.
uhhhh.... I don't know what you think, dude, but every person looks
different. Circumcised dicks look different too, some are long, some
are short, some are tight, some are loose. Your argument means nothing.
We are not talking about "uniformity of look", we are talking about leaving
everyone alone vs. snipping everyone so that they don't feel different from
each other. I don't think people would "feel they were missing something"
just because their penises are different looking than anothers, which is
not the same you could say about circumcision.
>
> If uniformity is the goal, then universal circumcision is the only way
> to go.
hahah... that's a load of shit. How about "everybody natural". I think
that's uniformity.
>
>
> Both totally intact and a mix of intact and circumcised will produce
> visual differences - and since this characteristic occurs naturally
> among the intact, and if we reject universal circumcision, it is a
> difference we simply have to learn to accept.
give it up.
John Pritchard
According to you then, we can trash once and for all the 'locker room
syndrome'. I won't object to that.
Circumcised dicks look different too, some are long, some
> are short, some are tight, some are loose. Your argument means nothing.
Yes but the differences within the circumcised (we were not discussing
size) are not as great as the differences within the intact and not as
casually visible - which is really the only signficant point if one is
considering body image or locker room syndrome.
> We are not talking about "uniformity of look", we are talking about leaving
> everyone alone vs. snipping everyone so that they don't feel different from
> each other.
Alright. "uniformity of look" is NOT an issue, according to you and in
the general sense I agree with you. In this you differ from many of your
colleagues. In the family circle, all other factors being equal, I think
that some consideration could reasonably be given to uniformity.
I don't think people would "feel they were missing something"
> just because their penises are different looking than anothers, which is
> not the same you could say about circumcision.
So it is not a matter of the locker room syndrome - it is a matter of
*feeling* that they were missing something. And however would they
arrive at that feeling?
And if they did, as seems to have been the case with one of the founding
members of the Movement, would it not be better to offer reassurance
based upon the truth than to demonize a safe, simple and benficial
procedure, intrude upon parental and religious rights and to create or
play upon fears that need not even exist?
> > If uniformity is the goal, then universal circumcision is the only way
> > to go.
>
> hahah... that's a load of shit. How about "everybody natural". I think
> that's uniformity.
No, that is the route to visual diversity.
>
> >
> >
> > Both totally intact and a mix of intact and circumcised will produce
> > visual differences - and since this characteristic occurs naturally
> > among the intact, and if we reject universal circumcision, it is a
> > difference we simply have to learn to accept.
>
> give it up.
I already had. I have never supported the locker room syndrome. I grew
up with diversity. We must learn to accept ourselves.
Craig Wagner
> According to you then, we can trash once and for all the 'locker room
> syndrome'. I won't object to that.
Nor would I.
> Circumcised dicks look different too, some are long, some
> > are short, some are tight, some are loose. Your argument means nothing.
>
> Yes but the differences within the circumcised (we were not discussing
> size) are not as great as the differences within the intact and not as
> casually visible - which is really the only signficant point if one is
> considering body image or locker room syndrome.
This is not true. Circumcision "styles" vary greatly. Some men
unfortunate enough to have had their frenulum removed may have a scar so
close to their glans that there is no visible difference in coloration on
the shaft of the penis to any but the MOST INTIMATE of observers.
Some men have a easily noticed skin color variation on either side of
their scar.
I have a friend with a fairly dark complexion whose circ scar is midway
down his shaft. The lower half of his penis is very dark, while the upper
half is almost pink. It's VERY visible to anyone who sees him naked.
(And I would never mention this to him, but it strikes me as quite
bizarre-looking and unattractive)
> Alright. "uniformity of look" is NOT an issue, according to you and in
> the general sense I agree with you. In this you differ from many of your
> colleagues. In the family circle, all other factors being equal, I think
> that some consideration could reasonably be given to uniformity.
Then I hope no son is ever born with a penis significantly longer or
bigger than his father's and brothers'! ;-)
Ice Man
Paul Hagen wrote:
> In article <gHA34.67180$I5.5...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > I said I was curious as to the reason. I think he may be the one with the
> > problem later in life, growing up next to predominantly intact peers.
>
> WAIT A MINUTE! You have just described "the locker room argument" where
> parents are concerned that if their boy's penis is different from the
> majority of his peers, he might feel shy/awkward/embarrassed about his
> difference in locker room situations - and just about every anti-circer
> I've ever seen post on that subject has completely dismissed "the locker
> room argument" as complete nonsense. So if this argument is bogus with
> regard to intact guys in predominantly circ'd contexts, shouldn't it be
> just as bogus for circ'd guys in predominantly intact contexts?
Of course the so-called locker room phenomenon is more a reflection of the
individuals self image than any physical trait. That is to say that if the
individual were not "embarassed" about his foreskin or lack thereof, he would find
some other physical feature to be concerned about. You see it is more an indicator
of low self esteem than it is any real physical difference. Certainly like a valid
reason for parents to inflict circumcision on their newborns.
The entire "locker room" premise remains "bogus".
Craig Wagner
of a child to be free from unnecessary circumcision suffered themselves
from the "locker room phenomenon," leading them to eventually get
circumcised themselves as adults. The thought that if their parents had
instilled a better sense of self-worth into them they would not have
experienced this "phenomenon" is one they don't seem to bring up.
Dr. Coonie
cwa...@his.com (Craig Wagner) wrote:
> > individual were not "embarassed" about his foreskin or lack thereof,
he
> would find
> > some other physical feature to be concerned about. You see it is
more an
> indicator
> > of low self esteem than it is any real physical difference.
Certainly
> like a valid
> > reason for parents to inflict circumcision on their newborns.
> >
> > The entire "locker room" premise remains "bogus".
I think its very bogus. I knew something about circs around the time I
took showers, 9th grade, about 1964. I saw at least four other intact
guys in a class of perhaps 15!
One guy had a very big uncut banana and no-one ever said the word about
circumcision!
Today kids are so much more savvy about such things its incredible.
I recall in 1962, about the time of my first CUM.. I had no idea what
this sticky stuff was, but I knew it felt good and I'd want to get more.
The upshot of this is simply to say kids in that era did NOT get good
sex education and unless you ran with the boys who would openly talk
about this crap you were in the dark. I certainly WAS!
Today I think most sixth graders have a better sex education and
knowledge base than I did at 13 or 14 !!
Also, I'd bet, although I have no proof, kids start having orgasmic sex
earlier, perhaps by two years or so.
Kids aren't going to be so stupid as to raze anyone today about intact.
If the intact guy is savvy he can put them in their place immediately.
I agree the lockeroom shit is still there as so many myths to try to
keep RIC going when its death date already should have pasted 50 years
ago.
Ma...@thelabyrinthe.net
Lockdown wrote:
> John Pritchard wrote:
>
> > Lockdown wrote:
> > >
> > > Paul Hagen wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <gHA34.67180$I5.5...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>,
> > > > lockd...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > deletion
> > >
> > > The locker room certainly exists for both cases, but is probably harder
> > > to deal with when people feel that they are "missing something" that everyone
> > > else has, as opposed to the mindset that there are "2 different styles of penis"
> > > that you keep banging on about.
> > > If no one circ'ed, there would be no locker room problems. (and most people
> > > say that thet don't get made fun of for their different penis. How many people
> > > would want to admit to looking at another guy's dick?)
> > > Certainly you could say that "if everyone circ'ed, there would be no issue",
> > > but we know that universal circ is unjustified, and it's your opinion that it's
> > > parental choice, so stopping circ'ing completely is the logical answer.
> >
> > But if everyone were circed (and I am not suggesting they should be),
> > everyone would look much the same.
> >
> > If no one were circed, everyone would NOT look much the same - there is
> > a great range of difference among the intact - from a long overhang to
> > those with a foreskin so short that it cannot be easily distinguished
> > from the circumcised.
>
> uhhhh.... I don't know what you think, dude, but every person looks
> different. Circumcised dicks look different too, some are long, some
> are short, some are tight, some are loose. Your argument means nothing.
How could it mean nothing when you just about quoted him verbatim?
footsti...@libero.it
Malk
casam...@yahoo.com
> I had the same issue that started this topic, and 2 months ago I started pulling my foreskin back. The first week the glans was very sensitive and hard to do ordinary stuff without discomfort, but after then, so far so good. Now my foreskin stays how I want it, or retracted or covering the head without problems. Now I can choose to be "circ'd" when I want it :p
David Edwards
> I am am circumcised myself but surely this permanent foreskin restraction would work only for men with very short foreskins. Otherwise it would not stay in place and would just slither back. I have read that Japanese have very short foreskins and after puberty Japanese boys keep it retracted. This gives some of the advantages of circumcision because they don*t trap urine and I suppose produce less smegma. This must cut down the smell a lot but I do not see how somebody with a long foresin could do do it'
>
>
I don't know about Japs but nearly all the uncut guys I was with which was in E. Europe, their foreskin covered the head of their dick even when it was erect. Usu with some foreskin still hanging off the end too. No way could they keep it retracted when it was soft if wouldn't stay pulled down when they were hard!
H.G.
March 7, 2014 at 3:48 pm #1107 REPLY
Mick G
This topic has been on my mind a lot lately. My wife and I are having a boy in a couple weeks and its something I’ve been putting off thinking about. I’m uncut and its just normal for guys in my family, but lately I’ve been thinking a lot about it.
I’m currently in a week or so long experiment of leaving it down throughout the day. Sometimes it gets pretty uncomfortable and painful, so I’ll tuck it back in.
First question – is there any adverse effects of doing that? It feels kinda like self-mutilation
My goal is to either:
1. Help me make a decision by living circumcised for a bit or
2. Get best of both worlds. Desensitize my self for sex and be able to leave it open throughout the day.
My main motivation is smell. It seems trite, but there’s all the self-conciousness that comes with that.
This site is the only place I’ve found with people who might remotely understand and has already answered so many of my questions.
March 8, 2014 at 8:07 am #1108 REPLY
David
Mick,
I read your post and, from what I’ve read on different sites, what you are doing is not uncommon. If you do a search under “permanent foreskin retraction”,”training foreskin to stay back” or similar words, you will find much info and opinions about this. Some of the opinions are for it while others are opposed. My opinion is, that as long as your foreskin is healthy;no phimosis or paraphimosis or other medical issues;it is prefectly fine to do this. I’m not cut and have tried this. It’s somewhat difficult for me to do this because my foreskin is rather thick. When it was back, I liked the appearance. Keeping your foreskin back will help you with deciding about getting circumcised. How does your wife feel about you keeping your foreskin back? How does she feel about circumcision? You said you and your wife are having a boy. Are you going to have him circumcised? If I ever have a son,my first preference would be to let him decide as a teen if he wants to be circumcised. However, if I’m living in a place where most boys are cut, he will be circumcised at birth. I would not want him to grow up with the bad feeling I grew up with being uncut. I’m considering getting circumcised for body image and health reasons. I think you’re making a good choice for yourself.You are not mutilating your body. Your reasons are truly valid. Wishing you all the best. Keep us all posted on how things are going
David
March 9, 2014 at 3:47 pm #1111 REPLY
Mick
Thanks, I really appreciate it. I don’t think I have any of those medical issues. It was pretty tight and painful when I started having sex because it would get pulled back, but that was years ago and I have little trouble pulling it back, and no problem keeping it down (i guess that’s an issue for some men due to your search term suggestion?)
I’m in my early 30′s and have never had any issues with it. I wasn’t big into sports either tho, so maybe not as many locker room experiences as other guys. As far as my wife’s opinion, she doesn’t really have one. We’ve both only been with each other so she hasn’t experienced any others to compare it to. She’s preoccupied with the pregnancy. Our plan now is to circumcise. Which is what got me thinking about it. Of course I do agree with the idea of letting him decide, in this part of the world (my guess is 90%-95% circumcised) I don’t think anyone would fault me for it. I would say I’ve never met a circumcised man who regretted it, but I do have a friend where it was cut to low, and experiences pain from the scar tissue (I tuned out after the story got a bit graphic)
So far it does feel cleaner, I’m enjoying it. Some mild irritation right at the uretha tho. I suspect that might be the “drying” process? Feels better when I pee, and like I said, I can always cover it back up. I know very little about this stuff… and I have weak stomach… honestly, I can only read this site in pieces, just a lot of D talk to take it all in at once.
March 9, 2014 at 3:23 pm #1110 REPLY
Drew
I wasn’t circumcised as a kid and I always felt like I was weird or an outsider because all the other guys in my area were cut. The summer before I entered junior high I was out fishing with my uncle. I had to stop to piss as we were walking to the lake and my uncle said “you’re not circumcised.” Of course I was embarrassed but he was really cool. Uncle Joe asked to check my foreskin. He pushed it back to expose the head and then pulled it forward. He said it was good that the skin would retract but “you need to keep the foreskin pushed back until you get circumcised.”
Uncle Joe explained that he also had a long foreskin that extended beyond the head of his penis. He played baseball and suffered minor irritations while sweating in his athletic supporter. He said he got tired of dealing with the foreskin and got circumcised when he joined the army. He told me the worst part of the procedure was the overly sensitive penis head rubbing against his clothing. He described the procedure, showed my his circumcised penis and explained why I should keep the skin retracted. When I was cut at age 18, my head was already used to being exposed.
So keep your foreskin retracted, see if you like the feeling. If you decide to get a circumcision, you won’t have to worry about excessive sensitivity.
March 9, 2014 at 3:53 pm #1112 REPLY
Mick
thanks Drew! Thats a great story, you sound lucky to have an uncle willing to talk to you about it. Nowadays I’d be afraid of going to jail if I had a conversation like that with a nephew (don’t have any yet, I might feel different in a couple years when they start coming).
and its good advice, thanks
March 9, 2014 at 4:18 pm #1113 REPLY
David
Mick,
Glad to read your post. It sounds like you’re progressing with keeping it back.You are making a good choice. If you like what you are experiencing, it is a good choice. It sounds like you are from the USA; what region are you from? Overall, the majority of US males are circumcised;the exception being some of the states in the West Coast. Are you going to get circumcised? Best wishes to you and your wife for a healthy baby! Keep us posted on how you all are doing.
David
March 9, 2014 at 4:31 pm #1114 REPLY
David
Drew,
I read your well-written post and can totally relate to your experiences and feelings growing up uncut. I had the same feelings as well. You were lucky to have an uncle who advised you to keep your foreskin back until you were circumcised. I wish I had been given that advice. This subject in the forum is creating some good responses. All uncircumcised boys with healthy foreskins should be informed about keeping it skinned back and they should be given good information about circumcision. This way they can make an informed choice about their bodies at a time when they are of age to start getting the benefits of circumcision. Keeping the foreskin back is a great way to prepare for being circumcised, as you will start experiencing what being circumcised will be like. Your advice is spot-on!
April 3, 2014 at 5:03 pm #1138 REPLY
Joe Frazer
These are great stories. I wish I had known of this when I was a teenager. I remember when I came home from boot camp, nearly clipped and had sex for the first time with my wife; I was amazed. the sex was great and I was able to keep going a whole lot longer and the organism was greater than anything I had experienced before. I don’t know if it will be that way for you Drew but I hope that it is. I too wish I had had an uncle who had told me what to do and it would have made my teenage years easier.
April 5, 2014 at 7:06 pm #1140 REPLY
Brian
i have kept my foreskin retracted for years now so keep it up! i prefer it this way so am now considering getting it cut off as it doesn’t really serve any purpose… i wish i had an uncle that would have helped me out like yours did Drew!
April 6, 2014 at 8:08 am #1142 REPLY
David
I’m finding that keeping the foreskin back is not that uncommon. I have been doing it off and on. I’m thinking about getting circumcised. I think you have made a good choice. I wish I had an uncle like Drew had to tell me about keeping it back. My teen years would have been easier.
April 18, 2014 at 8:40 pm #1158 REPLY
Drew
Glad that my response was helpful to you guys!I think there are many uncut males who shared similar experiences about being the “odd man out.” A site like this is so very useful to guys who think they are suffering alone with a difficult situation.
Like so many others have said, the ONLY regret is that you didn’t get circumcised sooner. Some municipalities have big signs in road construction zones which apply to adult circumcision: Temporary Inconvenience, Permanent Improvement.
April 19, 2014 at 9:06 am #1160 REPLY
David
Hi Drew,
Glad to read your post. Your response has definitely been a help to all of us here. Totally support training the foreskin to stay back before getting circumcised. I said it before; all uncircumcised boys with healthy foreskins should be educated about keeping their foreskins back and about the benefits of circumcision. This way they can make the best informed decisions for their personal health. Wish I had an uncle like yours! Training the foreskin back is a great way to prepare for entering a new phase of life as a circumcised man.
April 20, 2014 at 7:28 am #1161 REPLY
Nick
I kept my foreskin pulled back on and off from the age of about 17 for varying lengths of time. I went ‘full-time’ for four and half years before my circumcision. It had the benefit of allowing my glans to dry out and acclimatize, so after the ‘cut’ there was no painful over-sensitivity which many guys get.
I belonged to a number of ‘skin-back’ groups and sites, and it is amazing how many guys keep their foreskins back. Some do it more easily than others. Some do it because they like the look or feel; or to ‘pass’ as circumcised; or they were told to by their parents or brothers or partners; some for hygiene; and some because it is just more comfortable – they usually have big glans and a rather tight skin. Many go on to be circumcised. I also know a few guys who have such short foreskins that they retracted naturally during puberty. I gather that in Japan lads are taught to keep their foreskins pulled back from an early age, and so they all have exposed glans.
April 21, 2014 at 8:47 am #1162 REPLY
David
Hi Nick!
I have been involved off and on with skinned back groups like yourself. This is definitely not an uncommon practice. I have skinned back off and on. I’m hoping to get mine to stay back 24/7 to prepare for getting circumcised. In Japan, it is part of normal life for boys to skin back early. Living fully retracted for 4 years gave you plenty of time to know what circumcised life would be like. What style circumcision do you have? I’m considering a low cut and moderately tight. All boys not cut at birth, with healthy foreskins should be educated about skinning back and about the benefits of circumcision. It’s about health and overall well-being.
April 26, 2014 at 5:37 am #1167 REPLY
Nick
David –
I know loads of guys who keep their foreskins pulled back – usually for aesthetic reasons. There certainly seems to be a perception that having an exposed glans is more ‘manly’. I think that doing so from a young age allows the glans to develop unconstricted and thus flare out, and also the foreskin does not grow with the penis, as there is nothing to make it do so. I think the foreskin may even shrink a bit.
I have a high a medium-tight cut, as it allows for ‘growth’ ;)
April 26, 2014 at 9:00 am #1169 REPLY
David
Hi Nick!
Thanks for your reply. Thanks for the info on keeping the foreskin pulled back. Since you were skinned back for some time before your circumcision, you are in a position to speak from experience rather than someone that has either grown up cut or uncut. I’ve come to the conclusion that only guys who have chosen to get cut have the knowledge and life experience to say which is better. From everything I’ve read on message boards in different groups, the vast majority of males circumcised as teens or adults are glad they had it done and DO NOT WANT their foreskins back. To me, that speaks volumes.
July 25, 2014 at 5:49 pm #1262 REPLY
George
Before my circ this past February, I had kept my foreskin permanently retracted for about 10 years. I first started to do it because I joined a gym with a public changing area and felt odd being (LITERALLY) the only uncut guy there. Eventually I went permanent and stayed with my glans exposed until my foreskin was removed. I found it helped adjusting to being circumcised because I was already accustomed to having my glans permanently exposed.
August 18, 2014 at 2:02 pm #1297 REPLY
Jason Rork
I am currently precut, I love hearing about guys living skinned back, and wish I could do it 24/7, but sometimes my foreskin just for no apparent reason slides over the head and usually pulls some pubic hair under it.
This is extremely painful and irritating as well as embarrassing, as I either have to reach in my pants and skin back or excuse myself and go to a public restroom where I can readjust myself, sometimes to the chagrin of other males. When having sex I skin back and use a vaccuum pump with a silicone ring to keep the foreskin retracted, all of my partners prefer cut cock, so I try to keep it stripped as though I am cut until, I can get the thing fixed.
Thanks guys, I wish I knew of these sites where guys talk about keeping their skin back permanently .
August 23, 2014 at 7:33 am #1299 REPLY
David
Jason,
I like your term “precut” for an uncircumcised guy who is considering getting cirucmcised. If you are considering keeping your foreskin back until you get cut, you may want to think about either trimming your pubic hair or completely shaving it. I completely shave mine. Personal preference. It prevents pubic hair getting trapped under the foreskin. I’m “precut” now. I think the term precut establishes in one’s mind that circumcision is in one’s future.
February 18, 2015 at 10:26 pm #1352 REPLY
Jason Rork
Thanks David, I now have a gay bodybuilder, who visits my home every month to shave and shampoo with a 4% selenium shampoo, and Palmolive
for Men Classic Palm Extract Shave Cream rubbing it liberally into the retracted head. What is happening is the head is becoming call used,
Developing a leathery texture, so it takes longer for me to reach orgasm.
I am most pleased, as this slows down my firing time, in perpetration for the final Cut, my head will be prepared for public exposure!
March 27, 2015 at 8:36 pm #1356 REPLY
Charles
I’m not circumcised and never will be and just stumbled upon this fucked up site. Why would any man choose to cut part of his dick off? Dudes, this is NOT normal.
May 26, 2015 at 11:59 pm #1373 REPLY
Choice Maker
Keymaster
Charles,
I realize this is a late reply, but…
Some men have different desires for their body than you do. I am willing to concede that the majority of uncircumcised adult men wish to remain that way, but why would you try to degrade those who do not?
By attacking men who are deciding whether to pursue a voluntary and informed adult circumcision you are effectively saying that they should not be permitted control of their own bodies.
April 1, 2015 at 12:56 am #1357 REPLY
Mark
I am British, and 27. Most British blokes are uncut, but when I was 14 during a school medical it was decided I needed to be circumcised because of “irritation”. I was lucky in that I was able to explain to the doctor how I was worried about the mickey taking at school and feeling different. They gave me what they called a minimal circumcision, and when you look at me, you can just see the head exposed (a bit like you look when you are starting to get hard). When I am fully erect I look fully circumcised (and you can see the scar), but I had the best of both worlds. I didn’t get picked on at school, I always feel clean and the fact that the top part of the cock is exposed means I don’t have any problems when I pee – no smell during the summer, and no smegma, but I do shower every day of course.
Hope this helps. Just to answer Charles, I am wondering if he is British?. Here even in London it is quite unusual for a white middle class bloke to be circumcised, so it seems unusual, but in the States the opposite is true and you would get taken the mickey of because you are not cut
April 3, 2015 at 4:41 pm #1358 REPLY
Jason
I have since my Father showed me his cock, wanted to be like him and have a real Man’s cock, a clipcock, nice and sleek, with a big exposed helmet head, hard thick and proud, like my Dad’s. he said when I became a man I would choose to be circumsized and join the brotherhood of men, but until then I would be subservient to any man who was circumsized because they were exposed and proud of their nakedness to the world. it has been my desire to become that which my Father was, by skinning back and keeping my foreskin hidden until I can find the approximate man to cut this baby fat away from my manhood, high and tight!
April 4, 2015 at 9:19 am #1359 REPLY
George
I’m pretty sure that’s all bullshit, Jason.
May 30, 2015 at 1:10 pm #1380 REPLY
Austin
George, please be respectful of other people’s posts. Jason was making his point and you were being rude. I have found that those of you for want to ‘train’ the foreskin to stay back – you can find on amazon.com some foreskin rings that you place upon the retracted foreskin. The ring keeps the glans exposed.
July 16, 2015 at 11:02 am #1408 REPLY
Jason Rork
Thank you Austin! As a matter of fact I am looking into frenulum rings both temporary to see what it is like to be circumsized and the possibility of having a permanent frenulum ring installed just below the head of my penis.
Any imput as to anyone’s experience with this way of keeping the foreskin retracted would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks, Jason
August 5, 2015 at 9:02 pm #1415 REPLY
Jason Rork
Has anyone heard of tried this new product? at stealthinnerwear.com you can be fitted for a personal garment that you wear twenty-four hours that keeps your foreskin retracted.
October 17, 2015 at 10:57 pm #1428 REPLY
dave
I certainly agree that keeping retracted and being circumcised is the way to go.I was born midcentury and of course no internet or not much other information about such matters. My parents never talked about anything sexual so they were no help. Our house had no plumbing and little privacy. Most other boys were circumcised so they knew nothing about taking care of a foreskin. My foreskin would get so sore and stinky so I started keeping it retracted and learned how to turn the skin under inside to make it stay better. I had a long elephant trunk foreskin and a penis that shrinks down when soft so it was difficult to make it stay. I didn’t know if it was wierd to do that or if any other guys did that. When I needed another minor surgery I had a circumcision done. What a relief. My wonderful wife was glad i did it too and liked much better. Now I have lived half my life without a foreskin and and so glad I had it done and never missed dirty stinky soreskin. How I wish I had this information when I was young. I think every uncircumcised should be told about these matters so they can make theit own choice. I am glad my glans was used to exposure when I got cut and was no problem.
This is all from a website I found called choosingcircumcision.org
jackpi...@gmail.com
> I had the same issue that started this topic, and 2 months ago I started pulling my foreskin back. The first week the glans was very sensitive and hard to do ordinary stuff without discomfort, but after then,
Uckister777
> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 12:38:00 PM UTC-4, Malk wrote:
> > I had the same issue that started this topic, and 2 months ago I started pulling my foreskin back. The first week the glans was very sensitive and hard to do ordinary stuff without discomfort, but after then,
>
> But eventually your glans became desensitized.
>
jackpi...@gmail.com
> On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 10:35:26 PM UTC, jackpi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 12:38:00 PM UTC-4, Malk wrote:
> > > I had the same issue that started this topic, and 2 months ago I started pulling my foreskin back. The first week the glans was very sensitive and hard to do ordinary stuff without discomfort, but after then,
> >
> > But eventually your glans became desensitized.
> >
>
>
> That's what he wanted. He said it was hard to do "ordinary stuff without discomfort". Google "foreskin pain" and you will get over 2 million hits.
> A great many men experience real pain and discomfort from their foreskins
jackpi...@gmail.com
Correctly identifying the body part causing pain (glans or foreskin) seems important.