For anyone interested in what it is or why circumcised men are doing it for the last 50 years or so just google “Foreskin Restoration” For me I started 2 years ago but only got serious during the last year, Why I just wanted to get back to what I was born with. A little history, my father and older brother were born in England and are intact (uncircumcised). 75 to 80 percent of British men are intact. The two main reasons that men are circumcised, throughout history religion and in the last 100 years is the thought pushed by medical industry that it is healthier & cleaner. Studies that sight that view have been debunked. The latest clinical study this year from Ontario shows no link to an increase of STD’s or penile cancer in men with foreskins intact. The main reason circumcision is promoted by the medical industry in the USA is the sale of foreskins by clinic’s and hospitals to companies that break down the cells from foreskins and use them for a variety of uses from cosmetics to growing skin for burn patients and more. Please google “the Foreskin Industry”. You’ll be amazed at what you read from the amount of money involved and the lobbying of the medical industry to promote circumcision. Religion still plays a big part in promotion of circumcision mostly in the Jewish and Muslin religions. Fewer parents are agreeing to circumcision for their male babies though still about 70% in the USA are still circumcised. There is now an organization in North America called “Doctors Against Circumcision” They try to educate other Doctors about why they shouldn’t circumcise babies shortly after birth. Doctors are taught during their education that it’s better for the male baby to be circumcised. Many people now look at it as mutilating a perfectly heathy penis. Circumcision should be a decision made by the individual when they are old enough to decide wether they want the surgery or not. It should not be up to the parents to consent to a surgery that cuts off part of a child’s penis causing great pain and is unnecessary. The foreskin has more nerve endings and is more sensitive than the glans. There are a number of ways to restore the foreskin from surgery to longer more natural ways. I asked my Father when he was in his 70’s why he consented to my circumcision. He said the Doctor said it would be better for me. My brother who is older than me and intact has never had a problem with his penis or foreskin. Note: before reply to this thread, I have researched this topic thoroughly. Don’t quote me OLD flawed studies about HIV and penile cancer. My question is “ are there other men here that have gone through or are doing foreskin restoration? To those on here that are circumcised and happy with it continue on with a happy life. NOTE: THIS IS NOT A THREAD ABOUT WETHER YOU LIKE CIRCUMCISED OR INTACT PENISES. There are other threads about that.
So you get to state everything wrong with circumcision and then say this is not a discussion about the pros and cons? Sorry no! I hope your restoration works out. It will never truly be real foreskin. And yeah always been quite happy with my circumcised penis. And most cut guys I have had the discussion with who are cut are also happy being cut and like the appearance better. Be well.
I said this wasn’t a thread about wether you like circumcised or intact penises. Not pros and cons. The question asked is “are there other men here that have gone through or are doing foreskin restoration” I nice you like you circumcised cock, have a good life.
My point is it would have been better if you just asked that question. I have no issues with you wanting foreskin restoration. I hope it works out, seriously. But the rest of your long post was intactivist talking points which can be divisive.
Hey Jesse49! Yes, I spent quite a lot of time restoring my foreskin a bit a few years ago. I don't have the drive to continue these days but I kind of wish I did. Restoration has made a difference in the way I look and feel and I'm glad for the time I spent doing it. It's a long process but worth it for most men who take the time to restore. A lot of people don't really seem to understand why anyone would bother but those of us who have done some restoring do understand. I hope it all goes well for you and I hope and pray that more parents will realize the foreskin should not be removed on their kids.
As a cut guy I wish you luck, and you have opened my eyes to the neonate foreskin industry! Definitely mutilation and the practice should be banned until the owner can make his own decision Simon
I am fully restored. I came up with the concept of restoring the foreskin by repositioning the scar line to the very tip of the penis. A restoration done this way will provide you with the most gains in erotic sensitivity. The scar line will become a good facsimile of the now lost frenar band, and by expanding the surface of the inner skin, such skin will develop new nerve terminals under its surface, adding to the increase of erotic sensitivity. In the end, the goal is to have only inner skin in constant touch with the glans.
There's quite a lot to unscramble in the OP. To relate only to what's what in the USA is, in my opinion, very myopic. There's a world of skills and experience in other countries and thankfully, US medicine knows that and they all pool their knowledge and learning from practice. What about those that are done for medical reasons? To ignore that section leaves the OP open to spurious and potentially ill-informed opinion. He's conflating two things here - the study into one scenario and then using that result to back up his different argument. The question would be whether a circumcised penis might lead to increase in penile cancer, compared to un-circumcised penises. As to the increase in STDs, that's more to do with human behaviour than the consequences of surgery. So I shall continue this post, to try to inform people who may be considering such surgery either for themselves or their children. There are two types of circumcision, which means; to consider them as one, would lead to an ill-informed opinion. I was circumcised in the UK when I was 10 yrs old. It was for a medical 'condition', which, if I were older, I would be asking why they aren't going to do 'this' or 'that' instead of chopping it off. The opening was too small such that when I peed, the whole thing swelled up like a balloon and then, after I had 'finished' it took a few seconds for that balloon to shrink as the pee continued to pour out. It became sore at one point when I was 5/6 yrs and just before entering the surgical theatre I did a pee successfully and very anxiously (I recall), because it was so sore. That I was able to pee then, enabled the surgeon to delay, for 5 yrs, that, which turned out to be inevitable. (My suggestion would have been to slice 'vertically', for the length of the tight section, and to leave it [healed] in that sliced state, just like some people unpick the seam of their jeans to fit them over their [larger diameter] boots). Anyway; I have no complaints and neither does any of my partners. 1. It really isn't a painful and it's unhelpful to spread such a myth. Mine certainly wasn't. I was 10yrs old and remember. Indeed, when I tried to remove the bandage after a few days, it was stuck and so I bathed to let it all soften. It was still tender but the only pain I felt was during the attempts to remove of the bandaging, before it was sufficiently loosened and ready to be removed. Thereafter, for a while, (days not weeks) I was very sensitive around my glans because it no longer had the protection from the foreskin. After the bigger first bandage (which covered all of my glans) was removed, I needed only smaller/lighter dressings around the stitched area which meant the glans was exposed. Those too, would get a little stuck but there were two very kind nurses. Both were very reassuring as they changed my dressing so, when I was anxious that it might be as sore as removal of the first bandage, they reassured me, took their time and were very patient with me the, em, patient. I recall one explaining that I might notice him getting bigger quite often and not to worry; that it was natural. After the dressings were applied and the glans was left exposed, I was worried that an erection might break the stitching. I may have been a bit of a wuss back then (at 10) (or maybe starting my horny life) but, as my PJs brushed against him, he started to go up. I called the nurse over and she stayed with me, watching him (or pretending to watch him), until the erection subsided and I was feeling OK again. She repeated this a couple of times until I was reassured that this new strangeness wasn't going to break the stitching. I'll never forget them: two of the vast number of a much under-valued group of people in society. 2. There is (at least) two different types of circumcision. A. One, with the foreskin being shorter than normal. Literally just cut. B. The other; after cutting, when the sheath is then stitched to the penis itself, just below the glans. In the UK, mine was B. I believe B maybe cleaner in some respects because the inside of the sheath is then sealed so there are no issues with smegma, the bacterial gunk that - if not properly maintained - can be bad news for women if it gets into their vagina. However; I have no knowledge of where that smegma goes when it can't be washed away as normal and so, again, in this context, that Ontario study is irrelevant. It's the effects of circumcision that need to be presented. The result for me is a healthy-looking and apparently aesthetically clean penis. Or so I have been told on numerous several occasions. I shower daily in the morning ( or several times a day dependent on my exertion ) and I'll always have a second shower if I am going out for the evening. Without any issues; I am less sensitive now that I was yrs ago which may be because the glans is permanently exposed. It may be because I am beginning to age or, rather, my age is more than it used to be, given that I have been aging from when I was born. However; the only noticeable aspects (relative to guys I have spoken to about it) are:- i. I can pee without issues, ii. I can take a long time to orgasm when alone iii. I take longer to orgasm when with a GF which can be good and bad. (a quickie lasts no less than about 15 mins). My friends say its 4-5 for them. iv. It's easier to keep him shower-clean, (that may be different from surgically-clean). If the surgerical procedure is done the way mine was; I can see no issues with it. That's certainly tolerable, unlike the issue of FGM! That's what current societal emphasis should include but then, of course, it affects only women and is done to them by men.
