I've heard that a "partial" (cutting off only the tip of the foreskin rather than the whole thing) is used because some doctors realize it's impossible to determine how large the penis of this child will be when he's an adult and they're leaving more skin now to avoid problems with erections and sexual dysfunction. I'd love to hear from readers what their thoughts are on this.
We support an end to routine infant/child genital alteration surgery. We oppose RIC ~ Routine Infant Circumcision~ in North America & around the world. This blog is designed to have educational content, personal stories and graphic photography depicting normal and cut genitalia to expand knowledge of individuals and raise awareness of what circumcision really is. Please be advised this site is NSFW but it is NOT porn.
I don't understand the reasoning behind it. Why would you cut off anything? What do people think they're accomplishing by doing that? It seems like a less bad outcome inspired by the same kind of magical thinking that convinces people to opt for a more radical circumcision.
ReplyDeleteExactly Kurt. Magical thinking. People buy into the medical excuses. Circumcision protects against HIV and HPV and whatever other magic they can come up with. I say leave the foreskin alone and let the owner of the penis decide.
ReplyDelete(This is a reader question through formspring, by the way)
ReplyDeleteYeah, I keep answering those formspring questions. I can't help myself.
ReplyDeleteMy husband has a "partial", his mother said the 'sizer mentioned that he was using a new "technique". When I asked why she had it done at all, she said, "It's just what everyone did."
ReplyDeleteI'm really glad that he has at least as much foreskin as he does, it makes it easier for me to play with his penis. He hasn't been responsive to my restoration info, I'm hoping to use his remaining foreskin as incentive to restore and am just waiting for both the right words and the proper timing. He had mentioned sometime before restoration discussion that he never needed lube to masturbate because he had enough skin and he also shared with me how to "work" the skin. Now all I can think about is how much easier and fun it would be if he had more skin and how awesome it would be if the head "de-keratinized" - looking into a "hood" for his penis to help with that. Between the hood and talking about his lovely existing skin, I've got some hope! He did mention that restoration sounds like another form of genital mutilation. I have to leave that one alone until I calm down and have the right words to respond with.
Even with a partial circumcision the head is exposed in the underwear and it rubs against the underwear and loses sensitivity. Intact men experience a LOT of pleasure from the head alone.
ReplyDeleteWhy would anyone want to decrease a man's pleasure without his permission? So wrong!