Without knowing more, I really cannot say. If you recently got red spots on your glans, I suggest that you see a doctor. If you have always had red spots, it may be your natural coloration. Or, if you are circumcised, the red spots may be caused from when your foreskin was separated from your glans. Before I started restoring my foreskin, my dorsal corona was purple most of the time. I never knew why at the time. After I started restoring I realized that the purple area was the only part of my penis that was not keratinized. The purple area was my natural mucosal tissue showing.
I suggest that you check out the Foreskin Restoration / Intactivism Network forum. Many circumcised men have posted on that forum about discussions they have had with their parents. The insight you seek may be available there. If you are looking for a father who circumcised, a Google search would be your best bet to find a blog of a circumcising father.
Sorry, I have to disagree with you. The information at the top of the post came from the blog of Joshua's mother. She chose to make her son's illness and passing a public event by posting all the details on the Internet. She even posted on her blog while the doctors were trying to resuscitate her son. The facts she published speak for themselves.
If there is any evil, it was done by the doctor performing elective surgery on an infant who was medically fragile. The ultimate responsibility for the medical care of the infant was with the doctor. Infant circumcision is traumatic for healthy baby boys. For a neonate with CHD who is having complications, as Joshua was, it is unconscionable to perform infant circumcision. The doctor must be held accountable. I ask you, how many babies must die before we stop doing elective surgery on medically fragile and sick baby boys?
You are evil. Let the woman bury her son in peace. You are neither Joshua's doctor nor his parent. Publishing this sort of information is WRONG and hurtful.
I, too, have encountered guys who have a mid-shaft constriction that gives their penis an hourglass shape. Here is one thread on the Foreskin Restoration / Intactivism Network where a man discusses it. He has a picture showing the constriction. The topic is also discussed on another thread on the same forum. It seems that, while not common, there are men who suffer from this circumcision complication.
Use of the Plastibell can also cause the erect penis to be shaped like an hourglass when the ring slips down towards the body. The ring cuts off circulation creating a permanent constricting ring scar where the ring was. Further there are usually surgical scars with stitch marks along the shaft between where the ring was and the body. This is where they placed drainage tubes to relieve the swelling of the shaft.
I helped a young man on a restore list with this condition who didn't know why his penis was hourglass shaped when hard. His parents never told him. As he progressed with his restoration, the constricting scar moved toward the tip. I imagine the scar would become a very nice preputial ring.
Tally somewhere two computers ago I have this guy's hourglass picture with permission to use it.
Sorry but Sandra your comments don't stack up. You don't like the feel of a man getting the pleasure of his foreskin moving inside you? Even though it rubs against your g-spot gently and deliciously and makes him feel fab? What kind of misandrist says this kind of thing? You're cutting off your nose to spite your face! Also the comment that a man's erections are stronger if cut - nonsense. He has taut dry skin - that's not the same as having a stronger erection. In fact with extra skin to expand into a man who's uncut is bigger - by 0.8cm one Australian study found. Many intact men have a distinct area of ridged skin which sticks out behind the glans (where the extra foreskin concertinas) which rubs against a woman's G-spot quite precisely. Do you HONESTLY think that was a mistake Mother Nature made - to create ridges behind the glans in the EXACT area where they would interact with her G-spot ridges?? Have you ever looked at a condom designed 'for her pleasure' - they're clearly modelled on an intact man! Re Erectile dysfunction this is one of the side effects of circumcision - rare but it does occur. And the idea that woman like a man to go on and on and on pumping away is also nonsense. Orgasm is easier with an intact man - especially simultaneous orgasm - why on earth would you need him to pump on and on grinding his teeth (as I've seen circumcised men do) when you could have a great orgasm together? It's just nonsense.... Check out the study by Solinis et al on couples who experienced him being circumcised during their sexual relationship. This showed the women were even more p***ed off than the subjects themselves!! Although 2/3 said the man lasted longer only 1/6 thought this was a benefit. I think this proves my point, if such common sense that a soft sensitive ribbed penis is better for a woman needed to be proven!
What matters the most is that it's his body. The biggest tragedy behind circumcision is the inability of the person to prevent the procedure from being performed on himself (or herself in the case of FGM). Scientific studies have been performed which show that circumcision results in a loss of functionality, both in mechanics and sensation. It is an irrefutable fact that a circumcised man has fewer nerve endings than an intact man. No one should have the right to reduce another person's sexual functionality and sensation without their consent.
The content of my post meant to show that there are two sides to this story- the man AND his partner. I find it very sad that so many men have been denied what is rightfully theirs, and how many of their partners have suffered as a result. I think that if more women knew the difference, they would think twice about having it done to their sons. This is why I chose to share.
I have had experience with both cut and uncut men. I enjoyed all of them, but I really do prefer an uncut man. Intercourse is more natural and feels better. I can't speak for the men, but as a woman, I definitely can tell the difference during intercourse. With an uncut man, all of the nerve endings in his penis are still intact, ergo more sensitivity, better sex. Sadly, a man cut at birth, doesn't know the difference, because he has nothing to compare it to. I am an intactavist, and I believe this is mutilation and completely unacceptable.
Why the distaste for anatomically correct genitalia?
"I have a sister with an Arab man who is obviously circumcised, and she swears she will never go back to any man with a foreskin. She recoils at the mere thought of putting a foreskin covered penis in her mouth or in her body."
Sounds like neither you nor your sister have had sex with an anatomically correct man. For if you have, you would know that the foreskin retracts to reveal the head of the penis when erect.
It is a sexual fetish to prefer something as artificial and contrived as the circumcised penis, kind of like prefering amputees over men who sport all their limbs...
"Sex is sooo much different with a circumcised man and they can go the distance, while their erections are stronger and when they are inside you, they aren't jerking themselves off inside their foreskins.!!"
"Go the distance?" Actually I hear that since 20,000 nerves are missing, and the head of the penis becomes hard and callous, they can't feel when they're about to come, so they have premie problems. Also, since they get desensitized, over time they can no longer get it up. "Go the distance" my foot. "Strong errections?" Maybe if you consider Jell-o "strong..."
Human anatomy lesson: The foreskin retracts revealing the head of the penis, and even in the rare cases where it doesn't, the man still puts his "covered" penis in his woman's vagina. Whether he is "jerking himself off inside his foreskin" or not, you can't deny the penis must go and must stimulate the vagina, and when the penis is covered in the state of phimosis, it's just like being circumcised. (Because, like in men with phimosis, the skin on the circumcised penis is immobile.)
"I have had sex with both sides of the coins, and I think it fair to say that when there is an absence of foreskin, the sensations are much more pronounced."
No you haven't. You don't know what you're talking about. "Foreskin covered penis?" "Jerking off in their foreskins?" Uh, no.
Studies have been made, and even in women that quote unquote say they "prefer circumcised penises," they have also indicated that they are more likely to orgasm with men with anatomically correct genitalia.
"Circumcision does not need to be done on young babies who are tied down and brutalised, but can be done under a general anesthetic with adequate pain relief."
You've never had sex with an intact man, and from what it sounds like, you've never seen a circumcision before. Circumcision "can" be done with pain relief, but like 96% of babies aren't and are tied down and brutalized.
Would you advocate for female circumcision if it were done with pain relief? Or as baby girls so that they can't remember?
But what if men started thinking that women without labia are "sexier" than women with?
"My 2 sons are circumcised and they both know that their penises are princes amongst the paupers.
Long live circumcision!!!"
HAH! Yeah, you keep telling them that. Circumcision is tacky as blinging your baby. The circumcision rates in the US have fallen to 33%, according to the CDC. 'Fraid more and more circumcision is becoming the ghetto, backwoods thing to do, and your sons' penises are going to be the bumpkins among the educated.
Get educated. Have sex with an anatomically correct man. Take proper human anatomy class.
Yeah, I imagine if a man said he preferred genitally mutilated women because he said it felt better FOR HIM, never mind how the woman felt, you'd say that was an outrage, Sandra.
You have had 50% of your infant son's penile tissue removed largely because you think it feels better for the women during intercourse-- that just makes me feel kind of ill... for numerous reasons.
I was wondering if it turned out a man sexually preferred larger breasts on a women, would it be alright for him to have breast implants put in his daughters? Or would that be creepy and inappropriate?
If you or your friend/ sister prefer men with half their erogenous tissue cut from their penis, I say 'Good for You!'
All the research I have seen shows that 88% of female partners prefer intact over cut. Maybe you are in the 12%.
Partners of intact men are more likely to orgasm, and more often. You know the vaginal soreness one can get after intercourse? Not a problem with an intact partner. As women get older and perimenopausal, dryness is more of an issue for women with a circumcised man as well. Oh well.
Your argument is commonly used by men in parts of the world that practice female genital mutilation. They claim cutting girls without their consent is cleaner and men prefer it.
A penis that has had this elective modification is a penis that is much more likely to have the associated sexual dysfunctions: ED, premature ejaculation, priapism, meatal stenosis, painful erections.
I think the key is allowing men to make such a big decision for themselves, when they are capable of giving informed consent. I am glad to hear your sons had the benefit of anaesthesia, if so they are in a small minority. Only 6% of neonates are given even topical pain relief, which has been shown to be ineffective. General anaesthsia is too dangerous to give to new babies for a non-medically necessary surgery so it isn't given. So your fortunate sons must have been older, right?
75% of babies who are circumcized cannot readily breastfeed, I hope that wasn't a problem for them.
I'm honestly happy for you preferring what your partner has, and there are lots of guys out there with this particular modification. Just like some people like piercings, breast implants or tattoos. I just think we shouldn't make our children have those alterations because of our sexual preferences.
Honestly, I've never had sex with an intact man. I live in a part of the United States where almost every little boy has his foreskin ripped from him while he is strapped down and screaming. My husband is circumcised but our little boy is not. It's his body to decide what to do with...not mine. That's fine that your sexual preference is for circumcised penises but have you thought about what the sensation is like for a man? Circumcision has been proven to decrease sensitivity for men. The foreskin has thousands upon thousands of nerves. It also protects the head of the penis. Haven't you considered that these intact men you slept with simply didn't know how to use it? My circumcised husband is great at sex but that could change as he ages and his sensitivity decreases. Some men are good at sex. Others aren't. It doesn't always depend on being intact or circumcised. I seriously hope you did not circumcise your sons based on your own sexual preference. I find that a little disturbing to say the least.
@Sandra - Really??? I would give my eye teeth if my mother in law had left that decision up to me. I'll take a whole man over a mutilated one in a heartbeat. An intact man's penis works right! My DH would agree. It's the reason he's currently restoring. He would like to have back what was stolen from him. He would also have liked to avoid the 3 surgeries he's had to correct the Meatal Stenosis caused by the mutilation of his penis.
Intact men get feedback from their foreskin. I've heard it described by a man circumcised later in life as going from watching color TV to Black and white. From a woman's prospective, I personally like the idea of not having fluids squeegied out of my vagina by a cut penis. I like the idea that an intact man doesn't have to pound the crap out of you during sex to derive any pleasure. Intact sex is smooth and slow!
You might want to check out http://SexAsNatureIntendedIt.com/ to see in actuality what both partners get to miss out on when parents choose to cut their children's genitals.
How about we leave that choice up to a man and his partner rather than a child's parents who will never be effected by their child's penile status.
Why the distaste towards circumcised penises? I have a sister with an Arab man who is obviously circumcised, and she swears she will never go back to any man with a foreskin. She recoils at the mere thought of putting a foreskin covered penis in her mouth or in her body.
Sex is sooo much different with a circumcised man and they can go the distance, while their erections are stronger and when they are inside you, they aren't jerking themselves off inside their foreskins.!!
I have had sex with both sides of the coins, and I think it fair to say that when there is an absence of foreskin, the sensations are much more pronounced.
Circumcision does not need to be done on young babies who are tied down and brutalised, but can be done under a general anesthetic with adequate pain relief. My 2 sons are circumcised and they both know that their penises are princes amongst the paupers.
Long live circumcision!!!
@TD, good to hear about your progress. The more I tug, the more I am grateful that foreskin restoration works. As you say, the improvements are remarkable.
On October 3rd, I will have been restoring for 2 years. I started at CI2 and am now at CI4, about halfway there. I now have 100% flaccid coronal coverage all the time, and about 50% glans coverage most of the time. My wife says I have a "nice turtleneck" going. The improvement in sensation is remarkable. It's like growing up seeing the world in black and white and now getting little splashes of color. I may never get the HD color I was born with, but I'll take standard-def Technicolor over black and white any day! :)
My older brother was circumcised (not as an infant mind you...he was 2 or 3 I believe and had a few foreskin disorders that did not go away with steroid cream or other treatments). Since it was necessary he does not feel bad about it, but he resents letting his ex wife have their now 10 year old son cut for selfish reasons (she prefers the circumcised ones and uses the ignorant hygiene argument). If a man preferred women with smaller breasts I don`t think they`d do surgery on infant girls to prevent breast growth so why is it ok to continue this archaic practice?
Masturbation is a temptation when I have an extended tugging session. The short tugging sessions that fit in during the day don't last long enough so that I want to play. For the longer sesions, if I can do something else while tugging it helps to distract me from wanting to masturbate. Watching a YouTube video or reading a website - no porn! - is a good distraction so that I only tug and not play.
As your skin gets more flexible and mobile, you will see that you can push your glans into your skintube. By putting the bell of the 4restore against your glans and pushing it into your skin tube you can then tape your skin to the device. You do not have to pull your skin up to the device. At least, not at first.
Restoring Tally is just an ordinary guy who had to confront his prostate and circumcision problems. This site chronicles his journey in dealing with these issues. He has had prostate surgery and he is restoring his foreskin.
Recent comments
Without knowing more, I really cannot say. If you recently got red spots on your glans, I suggest that you see a doctor. If you have always had red spots, it may be your natural coloration. Or, if you are circumcised, the red spots may be caused from when your foreskin was separated from your glans. Before I started restoring my foreskin, my dorsal corona was purple most of the time. I never knew why at the time. After I started restoring I realized that the purple area was the only part of my penis that was not keratinized. The purple area was my natural mucosal tissue showing.
You may also wish to go to the Foreskin Restoration / Intactivism Network forum. You can post pictures and maybe someone can better answer your questions.
how come my penis head around the Corona & Glans area got red spot ?
I suggest that you check out the Foreskin Restoration / Intactivism Network forum. Many circumcised men have posted on that forum about discussions they have had with their parents. The insight you seek may be available there. If you are looking for a father who circumcised, a Google search would be your best bet to find a blog of a circumcising father.
I wish you luck in your search.
I am a 30 m here who is circumcised... I want to talk to a daddy....
dr_Relus@yahoo.com
that has done it to their son...
Sorry, I have to disagree with you. The information at the top of the post came from the blog of Joshua's mother. She chose to make her son's illness and passing a public event by posting all the details on the Internet. She even posted on her blog while the doctors were trying to resuscitate her son. The facts she published speak for themselves.
If there is any evil, it was done by the doctor performing elective surgery on an infant who was medically fragile. The ultimate responsibility for the medical care of the infant was with the doctor. Infant circumcision is traumatic for healthy baby boys. For a neonate with CHD who is having complications, as Joshua was, it is unconscionable to perform infant circumcision. The doctor must be held accountable. I ask you, how many babies must die before we stop doing elective surgery on medically fragile and sick baby boys?
You are evil. Let the woman bury her son in peace. You are neither Joshua's doctor nor his parent. Publishing this sort of information is WRONG and hurtful.
the best way to put it, you have inspired me! I am so happy knowing that i can do something and that its worth it, thank you.
I, too, have encountered guys who have a mid-shaft constriction that gives their penis an hourglass shape. Here is one thread on the Foreskin Restoration / Intactivism Network where a man discusses it. He has a picture showing the constriction. The topic is also discussed on another thread on the same forum. It seems that, while not common, there are men who suffer from this circumcision complication.
Use of the Plastibell can also cause the erect penis to be shaped like an hourglass when the ring slips down towards the body. The ring cuts off circulation creating a permanent constricting ring scar where the ring was. Further there are usually surgical scars with stitch marks along the shaft between where the ring was and the body. This is where they placed drainage tubes to relieve the swelling of the shaft.
I helped a young man on a restore list with this condition who didn't know why his penis was hourglass shaped when hard. His parents never told him. As he progressed with his restoration, the constricting scar moved toward the tip. I imagine the scar would become a very nice preputial ring.
Tally somewhere two computers ago I have this guy's hourglass picture with permission to use it.
Sorry but Sandra your comments don't stack up. You don't like the feel of a man getting the pleasure of his foreskin moving inside you? Even though it rubs against your g-spot gently and deliciously and makes him feel fab? What kind of misandrist says this kind of thing? You're cutting off your nose to spite your face! Also the comment that a man's erections are stronger if cut - nonsense. He has taut dry skin - that's not the same as having a stronger erection. In fact with extra skin to expand into a man who's uncut is bigger - by 0.8cm one Australian study found. Many intact men have a distinct area of ridged skin which sticks out behind the glans (where the extra foreskin concertinas) which rubs against a woman's G-spot quite precisely. Do you HONESTLY think that was a mistake Mother Nature made - to create ridges behind the glans in the EXACT area where they would interact with her G-spot ridges?? Have you ever looked at a condom designed 'for her pleasure' - they're clearly modelled on an intact man! Re Erectile dysfunction this is one of the side effects of circumcision - rare but it does occur. And the idea that woman like a man to go on and on and on pumping away is also nonsense. Orgasm is easier with an intact man - especially simultaneous orgasm - why on earth would you need him to pump on and on grinding his teeth (as I've seen circumcised men do) when you could have a great orgasm together? It's just nonsense.... Check out the study by Solinis et al on couples who experienced him being circumcised during their sexual relationship. This showed the women were even more p***ed off than the subjects themselves!! Although 2/3 said the man lasted longer only 1/6 thought this was a benefit. I think this proves my point, if such common sense that a soft sensitive ribbed penis is better for a woman needed to be proven!
What matters the most is that it's his body. The biggest tragedy behind circumcision is the inability of the person to prevent the procedure from being performed on himself (or herself in the case of FGM). Scientific studies have been performed which show that circumcision results in a loss of functionality, both in mechanics and sensation. It is an irrefutable fact that a circumcised man has fewer nerve endings than an intact man. No one should have the right to reduce another person's sexual functionality and sensation without their consent.
The content of my post meant to show that there are two sides to this story- the man AND his partner. I find it very sad that so many men have been denied what is rightfully theirs, and how many of their partners have suffered as a result. I think that if more women knew the difference, they would think twice about having it done to their sons. This is why I chose to share.
I have had experience with both cut and uncut men. I enjoyed all of them, but I really do prefer an uncut man. Intercourse is more natural and feels better. I can't speak for the men, but as a woman, I definitely can tell the difference during intercourse. With an uncut man, all of the nerve endings in his penis are still intact, ergo more sensitivity, better sex. Sadly, a man cut at birth, doesn't know the difference, because he has nothing to compare it to. I am an intactavist, and I believe this is mutilation and completely unacceptable.
"Why the distaste towards circumcised penises?"
Why the distaste for anatomically correct genitalia?
"I have a sister with an Arab man who is obviously circumcised, and she swears she will never go back to any man with a foreskin. She recoils at the mere thought of putting a foreskin covered penis in her mouth or in her body."
Sounds like neither you nor your sister have had sex with an anatomically correct man. For if you have, you would know that the foreskin retracts to reveal the head of the penis when erect.
It is a sexual fetish to prefer something as artificial and contrived as the circumcised penis, kind of like prefering amputees over men who sport all their limbs...
"Sex is sooo much different with a circumcised man and they can go the distance, while their erections are stronger and when they are inside you, they aren't jerking themselves off inside their foreskins.!!"
"Go the distance?" Actually I hear that since 20,000 nerves are missing, and the head of the penis becomes hard and callous, they can't feel when they're about to come, so they have premie problems. Also, since they get desensitized, over time they can no longer get it up. "Go the distance" my foot. "Strong errections?" Maybe if you consider Jell-o "strong..."
Human anatomy lesson: The foreskin retracts revealing the head of the penis, and even in the rare cases where it doesn't, the man still puts his "covered" penis in his woman's vagina. Whether he is "jerking himself off inside his foreskin" or not, you can't deny the penis must go and must stimulate the vagina, and when the penis is covered in the state of phimosis, it's just like being circumcised. (Because, like in men with phimosis, the skin on the circumcised penis is immobile.)
"I have had sex with both sides of the coins, and I think it fair to say that when there is an absence of foreskin, the sensations are much more pronounced."
No you haven't. You don't know what you're talking about. "Foreskin covered penis?" "Jerking off in their foreskins?" Uh, no.
Studies have been made, and even in women that quote unquote say they "prefer circumcised penises," they have also indicated that they are more likely to orgasm with men with anatomically correct genitalia.
"Circumcision does not need to be done on young babies who are tied down and brutalised, but can be done under a general anesthetic with adequate pain relief."
You've never had sex with an intact man, and from what it sounds like, you've never seen a circumcision before. Circumcision "can" be done with pain relief, but like 96% of babies aren't and are tied down and brutalized.
http://articles.cnn.com/1997-12-23/health/9712_23_circumcision.anestheti...
Would you advocate for female circumcision if it were done with pain relief? Or as baby girls so that they can't remember?
But what if men started thinking that women without labia are "sexier" than women with?
"My 2 sons are circumcised and they both know that their penises are princes amongst the paupers.
Long live circumcision!!!"
HAH! Yeah, you keep telling them that. Circumcision is tacky as blinging your baby. The circumcision rates in the US have fallen to 33%, according to the CDC. 'Fraid more and more circumcision is becoming the ghetto, backwoods thing to do, and your sons' penises are going to be the bumpkins among the educated.
Get educated. Have sex with an anatomically correct man. Take proper human anatomy class.
Yeah, I imagine if a man said he preferred genitally mutilated women because he said it felt better FOR HIM, never mind how the woman felt, you'd say that was an outrage, Sandra.
You have had 50% of your infant son's penile tissue removed largely because you think it feels better for the women during intercourse-- that just makes me feel kind of ill... for numerous reasons.
I was wondering if it turned out a man sexually preferred larger breasts on a women, would it be alright for him to have breast implants put in his daughters? Or would that be creepy and inappropriate?
If you or your friend/ sister prefer men with half their erogenous tissue cut from their penis, I say 'Good for You!'
All the research I have seen shows that 88% of female partners prefer intact over cut. Maybe you are in the 12%.
Partners of intact men are more likely to orgasm, and more often. You know the vaginal soreness one can get after intercourse? Not a problem with an intact partner. As women get older and perimenopausal, dryness is more of an issue for women with a circumcised man as well. Oh well.
Your argument is commonly used by men in parts of the world that practice female genital mutilation. They claim cutting girls without their consent is cleaner and men prefer it.
A penis that has had this elective modification is a penis that is much more likely to have the associated sexual dysfunctions: ED, premature ejaculation, priapism, meatal stenosis, painful erections.
I think the key is allowing men to make such a big decision for themselves, when they are capable of giving informed consent. I am glad to hear your sons had the benefit of anaesthesia, if so they are in a small minority. Only 6% of neonates are given even topical pain relief, which has been shown to be ineffective. General anaesthsia is too dangerous to give to new babies for a non-medically necessary surgery so it isn't given. So your fortunate sons must have been older, right?
75% of babies who are circumcized cannot readily breastfeed, I hope that wasn't a problem for them.
I'm honestly happy for you preferring what your partner has, and there are lots of guys out there with this particular modification. Just like some people like piercings, breast implants or tattoos. I just think we shouldn't make our children have those alterations because of our sexual preferences.
Nancy
Honestly, I've never had sex with an intact man. I live in a part of the United States where almost every little boy has his foreskin ripped from him while he is strapped down and screaming. My husband is circumcised but our little boy is not. It's his body to decide what to do with...not mine. That's fine that your sexual preference is for circumcised penises but have you thought about what the sensation is like for a man? Circumcision has been proven to decrease sensitivity for men. The foreskin has thousands upon thousands of nerves. It also protects the head of the penis. Haven't you considered that these intact men you slept with simply didn't know how to use it? My circumcised husband is great at sex but that could change as he ages and his sensitivity decreases. Some men are good at sex. Others aren't. It doesn't always depend on being intact or circumcised. I seriously hope you did not circumcise your sons based on your own sexual preference. I find that a little disturbing to say the least.
@Sandra - Really??? I would give my eye teeth if my mother in law had left that decision up to me. I'll take a whole man over a mutilated one in a heartbeat. An intact man's penis works right! My DH would agree. It's the reason he's currently restoring. He would like to have back what was stolen from him. He would also have liked to avoid the 3 surgeries he's had to correct the Meatal Stenosis caused by the mutilation of his penis.
Intact men get feedback from their foreskin. I've heard it described by a man circumcised later in life as going from watching color TV to Black and white. From a woman's prospective, I personally like the idea of not having fluids squeegied out of my vagina by a cut penis. I like the idea that an intact man doesn't have to pound the crap out of you during sex to derive any pleasure. Intact sex is smooth and slow!
You might want to check out http://SexAsNatureIntendedIt.com/ to see in actuality what both partners get to miss out on when parents choose to cut their children's genitals.
How about we leave that choice up to a man and his partner rather than a child's parents who will never be effected by their child's penile status.
Why the distaste towards circumcised penises? I have a sister with an Arab man who is obviously circumcised, and she swears she will never go back to any man with a foreskin. She recoils at the mere thought of putting a foreskin covered penis in her mouth or in her body.
Sex is sooo much different with a circumcised man and they can go the distance, while their erections are stronger and when they are inside you, they aren't jerking themselves off inside their foreskins.!!
I have had sex with both sides of the coins, and I think it fair to say that when there is an absence of foreskin, the sensations are much more pronounced.
Circumcision does not need to be done on young babies who are tied down and brutalised, but can be done under a general anesthetic with adequate pain relief. My 2 sons are circumcised and they both know that their penises are princes amongst the paupers.
Long live circumcision!!!
@TD, good to hear about your progress. The more I tug, the more I am grateful that foreskin restoration works. As you say, the improvements are remarkable.
Keep on tugging!
On October 3rd, I will have been restoring for 2 years. I started at CI2 and am now at CI4, about halfway there. I now have 100% flaccid coronal coverage all the time, and about 50% glans coverage most of the time. My wife says I have a "nice turtleneck" going. The improvement in sensation is remarkable. It's like growing up seeing the world in black and white and now getting little splashes of color. I may never get the HD color I was born with, but I'll take standard-def Technicolor over black and white any day! :)
Hey there, thanks for the plug! I'm glad you enjoyed my blog post.
www.lifeofcarla.blogspot.com
My older brother was circumcised (not as an infant mind you...he was 2 or 3 I believe and had a few foreskin disorders that did not go away with steroid cream or other treatments). Since it was necessary he does not feel bad about it, but he resents letting his ex wife have their now 10 year old son cut for selfish reasons (she prefers the circumcised ones and uses the ignorant hygiene argument). If a man preferred women with smaller breasts I don`t think they`d do surgery on infant girls to prevent breast growth so why is it ok to continue this archaic practice?
i have done this and thought about this by myself and i seen more results in 2 days then i have when i tried to restore manually for a year
Masturbation is a temptation when I have an extended tugging session. The short tugging sessions that fit in during the day don't last long enough so that I want to play. For the longer sesions, if I can do something else while tugging it helps to distract me from wanting to masturbate. Watching a YouTube video or reading a website - no porn! - is a good distraction so that I only tug and not play.
As your skin gets more flexible and mobile, you will see that you can push your glans into your skintube. By putting the bell of the 4restore against your glans and pushing it into your skin tube you can then tape your skin to the device. You do not have to pull your skin up to the device. At least, not at first.
Keep on tugging!
Who is this guy?
Restoring Tally is just an ordinary guy who had to confront his prostate and circumcision problems. This site chronicles his journey in dealing with these issues. He has had prostate surgery and he is restoring his foreskin.
Read more about Tally
Recent Blog Posts
more . . .
Blog Tags
Monthly Archive of Blogs
Recent Web Links
more . . .
Recent comments
Calendars
Foreskin Restoration Calendar
Intactivist Calendar
Terms of Service | About | Contact
RestoringTally.com is a blog addressing Men's issues, particularly prostate problems and circumcised men who are restoring their foreskins.
Tell someone you love how nice it is to have a foreskin.