My Circumcision Story

Otis Driftwood

4skin wrote: »

Here I know it's not good manners to talk back to moderators on boards but Wibbs will you ever give it a rest. We know you are against circumcision unless where absolutely necessary, but that's no reason to be condescending to people who prefer otherwise.

You've presented all the facts etc which is great, but I just really can't understand why you are so anti-circ. The vast majority of people here are very pleased with their decision, it's each to his own and if someone prefers a tight cut or whatever that's up to them, you seem to take personal insult when someone recommends one thing or another regarding a circ. Were you bullied by a circumcised child or what?:p

Anyway that's my contribution for the day.

/awaits ban

Just to clarify,Wibbs doesnt moderate this forum so like me when using any other forum on boards,he is posting here as a member only.Any posts he has made have been what I believe to be an effort to give as much information as is possible to men who may be considering a circ and that in some circumstances the circ is not the only option.These posts have been made in line with the charter and he has posted links to validate what he has been saying.You certainly arent going to be banned for the above,this isnt even a warning by the way however what you are doing is what is known as back seat modding and that is frowned upon on every forum on boards..If you feel posts in this thread or on any other thread on boards arent suitable for the thread then click the report post icon,its a little exclamation mark in a red and white triangle in the bottom left of every post.Hope that clears things up for you.

Nip The Tip

4skin wrote: »

Here I know it's not good manners to talk back to moderators on boards but Wibbs will you ever give it a rest. We know you are against circumcision unless where absolutely necessary, but that's no reason to be condescending to people who prefer otherwise.

You've presented all the facts etc which is great, but I just really can't understand why you are so anti-circ. The vast majority of people here are very pleased with their decision, it's each to his own and if someone prefers a tight cut or whatever that's up to them, you seem to take personal insult when someone recommends one thing or another regarding a circ. Were you bullied by a circumcised child or what?:p

Anyway that's my contribution for the day.

/awaits ban

I don't think he is anti-circumcision, but anti-circumcisions-for-silly-cultural-or-religious-reasons-and-because-docs-have-a-tendency-to-shout-CIRCUMCISION!! CIRCUMCISION!!-instead-of-trying-the-alternative-less-invasive-corrective-measures-first. I believe he is pro-circumcision when there is a medical reason and the alternatives don't work. And possibly when you get it done just because you WANT to get it done..

4skin

Yeah but my point is, Wibbs afaik has not being circumcised, but yet he reckons us circumcised folk don't have "fully-functional penises" and that we have big decreases in sexual pleasure. I'm very, very pleased with my circ, and have experienced none of these drawbacks, and when things like that are said it's just annoying because I know when your nervous about a problem 1 bad comment is worth 10 good ones and I'm just concerned that you would be putting people off.

westskipper

Wibbs wrote: »

Eh a normal, healthy, fully functioning penis has a foreskin that covers the glans, keeping said glans sensitive and moist and retracts comfortably when required for sex. This is a fact. No if's buts or maybes. Circumcision may be for cultural reasons, but medically surely it's done to relieve a condition and to preserve as much of the natural function as possible? It's hardly "one thing or another" as seems to be the perception of a few on this thread.

Yeah but Wibbs, none of us had normal fully functioning penises in the first place, thats the whole point.....

Congrats if you have one, you should be very proud.:D

Stu

Well, i was told i need a full circumcision after a failed Frenuloplasty even though i don't have a tight foreskin. The urologist in my opinion is not doing his job properly by giving me misinformation when i only need, and will be having a Frenectomy instead. Less work for him and i get to keep my foreskin but i had to argue my case with him :rolleyes: and he eventually agreed to do a Frenectomy (i'll be getting it done in less than 2 months).

I get the impression that my urologist didn't want to lose face when i told him i wanted a Frenectomy because he knows best and who am i to question his expert judgement even though its my body and a decision i have to live with for the rest of my life.

Fair play to the guys who are happy with the Circ but many of you guys only needed a Frenectomy or partial circumcision and only in the most severe of cases is a full circumcision needed and this is the very pertinent point Wibbs has been making.

Without labouring the point, the foreskin has a function so the more you keep of it, the better. A fully retractable foreskin via a partial circ is better than no foreskin. For those of you planning on getting a full Circumcision, have a read of this first.

http://www.nocirc.org/touch-test/touchtest.php

westskipper

Stu wrote: »

Well, i was told i need a full circumcision after a failed Frenuloplasty even though i don't have a tight foreskin. The urologist in my opinion is not doing his job properly by giving me misinformation when i only need, and will be having a Frenectomy instead. Less work for him and i get to keep my foreskin but i had to argue my case with him :rolleyes: and he eventually agreed to do a Frenectomy (i'll be getting it done in less than 2 months).

I get the impression that my urologist didn't want to lose face when i told him i wanted a Frenectomy because he knows best and who am i to question his expert judgement even though its my body and a decision i have to live with for the rest of my life.

Fair play to the guys who are happy with the Circ but many of you guys only needed a Frenectomy or partial circumcision and only in the most severe of cases is a full circumcision needed and this is the very pertinent point Wibbs has been making.

Without labouring the point, the foreskin has a function so the more you keep of it, the better. A fully retractable foreskin via a partial circ is better than no foreskin. For those of you planning on getting a full Circumcision, have a read of this first.

http://www.nocirc.org/touch-test/touchtest.php

if any of the information which is presented in that paper were correct, i would be the first in line shouting YES, HERE IS THE PROOF, DONT GET IT DONE.....but i cannot agree with it, because as an adult circumcised man myself, i can state that i havent experienced any of the loss of sensitivity that is proposed by the authors.
There are a number of obvious flaws in the study, which is not surprising when you look at the original article and realise that the primary author and the funding for the study both came from NOCIRC, the main looney american radical anti circumcision association. Therefore there is bias from the beginning and a prejudice towards finding a particular set of results which is aligned with the aims of its sponsor ??

The paper did not report whether the males studied were circumcised at birth, or in adult life ?
The paper did not report on the loss of sensitivity proportional to the amount of inner foreskin removed ?

I didnt get circumcised until age 40, and because i asked for a 'high' cut, i have lost at most 10% of my inner foreskin, so al lof the ridged band and other erogenous zones mentioned are still there, and they work exactly as they always did. There is no loss. The slight loss of sensitivity at the glans is a welcome feature, as it was over sensitive before.

My fear is that these daft american studies serve to scare men who need surgical correction away from getting the procedure done. This is unfair.

The only person who is qualified to give you an honest opinion of pre versus post circumcision sensations is someone who has had it done themselves, not someone who has read an article on the internet....

Wibbs

Nip The Tip wrote: »

I don't think he is anti-circumcision, but anti-circumcisions-for-silly-cultural-or-religious-reasons-and-because-docs-have-a-tendency-to-shout-CIRCUMCISION!! CIRCUMCISION!!-instead-of-trying-the-alternative-less-invasive-corrective-measures-first. I believe he is pro-circumcision when there is a medical reason and the alternatives don't work. And possibly when you get it done just because you WANT to get it done..

Nail on the head*. The fetish merchants really get on my wick*. The porn stars are cut that's natural you know types.

4skin wrote: »

Yeah but my point is, Wibbs afaik has not being circumcised, but yet he reckons us circumcised folk don't have "fully-functional penises"

Well factually speaking you don't. If you had as westskipper said you didn't in the first place, hence the circ(unless you were done at birth, but that's pretty much dark ages guff).

when things like that are said it's just annoying because I know when your nervous about a problem 1 bad comment is worth 10 good ones and I'm just concerned that you would be putting people off.

To quote Nip the Tip above "-because-docs-have-a-tendency-to-shout-CIRCUMCISION!! CIRCUMCISION!!-instead-of-trying-the-alternative-less-invasive-corrective-measures-first" and anything that helps a man make an informed decision instead of just assuming "doctor knows best, you know" is a good thing in my humble. And it is my humble that - and the experiences of the guys in this thread prove it - most docs go straight for the full monty. Why? IMHO "it how it's always been done/sure it's no big loss/I don't know alternatives/I'm not skilled enough to offer alternatives.

westskipper wrote: »

Yeah but Wibbs, none of us had normal fully functioning penises in the first place, thats the whole point.....

Yep and as I have pointed out more than once in this thread, a circumcised willy is a better bet than a non circumcised one that doesn't work.

westskipper wrote: »

Therefore there is bias from the beginning and a prejudice towards finding a particular set of results which is aligned with the aims of its sponsor ??

True though sadly all too common in research these days. Hell early in the thread we had a link from some guy who had some muppet on the anti foreskin brigade equating anti circumcision people with kiddie fiddlers for gods sake.

However it stands to reason that exposure and subsequent drying out and keretinisation of the glans will reduce sensitivity in that area. Apart from the early days where the memory of previous sensitivity is fresh, it's likely men will not notice(a good thing). From what I've read men who do this whole foreskin reconstruction deal report increased sensitivity across the board. They're the other side of the daft foreskin fetish eejits though.

I hate to say it and plug into a stereotype, but it's the "loony yanks" again. Either you have one side that see the removal of the forskin as a sexual/cultural fetish against the other side who see any suggestion of its removal for medical reasons as bogus. Then we have the (frankly morons) hanging weights outa their mickey to grow one back. Fcukwits on both sides.



TL;DR? Basically I have no issue whatsoever with circumcision for medical reasons and it clearly has major benefits when the alternative is basically a broken cock. But I don't see why it's such an issue with trying less extreme methods, including surgery rather than immediately going for the lazy option. It's like if dentists rather than filling cavities in teeth always went for extraction as a first choice. Would you go back to that dentist? It's frankly daft to me, medically and logically.




* double entendres or wha?

westskipper

That was the best, most sensible, most considered and well thought out response from any of the 'not convinced' posters on this thread for a long time.

Well done Wibbs, you have summed up all sides of the debate quite nicely.

I am just as anti-routine childhood circumcision as you, my own son is not circumcised and i dont believe anybody has the right to remove any part of his foreskin except he himself if he so chooses in later life.

Unfortunately, like baldness, foreskin/frenulum problems tend to be hereditary, so that question might well be one he has to address from his teenage years onwards.

Why dont we setup an online poll on this thread so that we can ask the folks out there what they think ? Is they have had the chop, at what age, what style, any loss of sensitivity, why did they get it done, would they do it again if they had the opportunity, would they advise other to consider it or avoid it, etc....it would be interesting to hear what irish guys think....

Stu

Westskipper, i am not knocking circumcision at all and the circ you had done seems like it was the ideal solution to your problem especially having lost only 10% of your foreskin.

The issue i have, is with urologists wanting to totally remove the foreskin without looking at alternatives first. A partial Circ is an option that seems to be dismissed by most Urologists, why, i don't know, but in this day and age every Urologist should be totally clued up on the various procedures available and discuss each and everyone of them with the patient and let them decide what they want to do, thats all.

OK, it might mean a second OP if the first option doesn't work but at least the patient is in control and is not being pushed into something they might have reservations about. I could be wrong but I don't think my Urologist has ever performed a Frenectomy but yet he is well aware of the procedure. Why didn't he put that on the table as an option bearing in mind that a Frenectomy is exactly what i need based on the problem i am having. It seems ludicrous that i had to ask him to do a Frenectomy and yet he still argued that i should get a full Circ.

I mentioned that i had used a Glansie Tool to fix slight Phimosis about a year ago and i now had no Foreskin issues but he didn't even know what a Glansie Tool was. It's like a Computer Technician not knowing what "Windows 7" is.

Wibbs

westskipper wrote: »

I am just as anti-routine childhood circumcision as you, my own son is not circumcised and i dont believe anybody has the right to remove any part of his foreskin except he himself if he so chooses in later life.

+1

I suppose westskipper where I have the main issue is the subtle and not so subtle fashion/fetish aspect of it and this masquerading under a medical pretence.

4skin wrote:

We know you are against circumcision unless where absolutely necessary, but that's no reason to be condescending to people who prefer otherwise.

To me an interesting choice of words. Why would anyone undergo a surgery which involves weeks of recovery and the removal of tissue if it wasn't "absolutely necessary"? Makes no medical or logical sense. Unless it's elective body modification. You do hear of american men getting the snip to "fit in" and that's a bit mad, but if one is desperate to fit in then fine. There is an undercurrent with some with the fetish, body modification aspect. Again that's fine, but its not medical at that stage and shouldn't be read as same IMHO.

Stu wrote:

Why didn't he put that on the table as an option bearing in mind that a Frenectomy is exactly what i need based on the problem i am having. It seems ludicrous that i had to ask him to do a Frenectomy and yet he still argued that i should get a full Circ.

A mix of he never did it so is wary of trying, doing what he's always done, simple lack of knowledge and a side order of "how dare you! I'm a doctor you know" ballsology. Like any trade, you get good and bad. To be fair medicine is very good at winnowing out the chaff but they do get through. IMHO and its been my experience women doctors are less likely to come out with the "how dare you question me" line and as more and more go into the profession, that can only be a good thing.

4skin

Wibbs wrote: »

To me an interesting choice of words. Why would anyone undergo a surgery which involves weeks of recovery and the removal of tissue if it wasn't "absolutely necessary"? Makes no medical or logical sense. Unless it's elective body modification. You do hear of american men getting the snip to "fit in" and that's a bit mad, but if one is desperate to fit in then fine. There is an undercurrent with some with the fetish, body modification aspect. Again that's fine, but its not medical at that stage and shouldn't be read as same IMHO.

You see this is probably what you can't understand because you've never had such problems. You don't realise what it's like to be constantly bothered by such a problem, so when you do eventually go and get it sorted you just want to get it done once and for all.

My doc mentioned other treatments but said a full circ was by far the best because I had a severe enough case and that a good percentage of other treatments ended up not working in the long-term. So my attitude was "yeah cheers just get it done once and for all."

The analogy of "If there was something up with your hand you wouldn't chop off the whole arm" is just ridiculous, it's more like cutting off your earlobe if it was badly infected or something.

So as a result of my full circ I have;

• A fully working penis
• One that is aesthetically pleasing
• One that women prefer(in my experience)
• Don't ever have to worry about any further problems
• Masturbation is much better

And this whole thing about getting it done to fit in or to look like a pornstar, so what? It's not you they're doing it too. The same could be said about tattoos or piercings? I know first hand one of my mates who was circumcised for years who's called jew-knob by the boys, I'm sure he sometimes wished he had a foreskin to "fit-in", equally true to the american kid who's called hoodie or whatever, I'm sure he'd like to fit-in.

Stu

4skin, your talking utter rubbish with some of the points you made. Women don't care what your penis looks like as long as you can use it, did you read this off some american pro-circumcision website :rolleyes:.

As for masturbation, how can it be any better. The foreskin, even when it was tight has never affected my ability to masturbate, infact, for the purpose of masturbation, the foreskin rubbing off the glans is quite nice and enhances the pleasure of masturbation and this with a very very short frenulum.

Anybody who gets their foreskin removed for aesthetic reasons is vacuous and easily lead in my opinion. American pornstars for the most part didn't have a choice in the matter as they were circumsized at birth, comparing foreskin removal to having a tattoo is absurd.

Wibbs

4skin wrote: »

You see this is probably what you can't understand because you've never had such problems. You don't realise what it's like to be constantly bothered by such a problem, so when you do eventually go and get it sorted you just want to get it done once and for all.

My doc mentioned other treatments but said a full circ was by far the best because I had a severe enough case and that a good percentage of other treatments ended up not working in the long-term. So my attitude was "yeah cheers just get it done once and for all."

And I have no issue with this at all and indeed have stated thus throughout this thread. Though I would be a little more circumspect than some going on just one medical opinion*.

The analogy of "If there was something up with your hand you wouldn't chop off the whole arm" is just ridiculous, it's more like cutting off your earlobe if it was badly infected or something.

With respect no it's not. To take your analogy, it's more like removing the entire ear because a piercing got infected. In that actual case, first tack a doctor would likely take are antibiotics, then if it got real necrotic removal of the earlobe, if that spread then and only then the ear itself would go.

So as a result of my full circ I have;


A fully working penis

True. Though more specifically a better functioning penis where before function was compromised by a foreskin problem. A fully working penis by definition is one where the evolutionary function is not compromised and retains a foreskin.

Don't ever have to worry about any further problems

True. Certainly in the sense of foreskin problems.

Masturbation is much better

Ok, well that would be a personal thing. Some cut guys on this thread have said they can jerk off with a dry hand, that to me as an intact man would be :eek::eek::eek:. That right there tells me sensitivity is seriously effin reduced. That is something no amount of studies suggesting otherwise are gonna be believable to me personally.

Actually no. To be fair? It tells me sensitivity would be seriously reduced for me if I could do that. And I love that sensitivity, that nuance of touch. It does not mean another man would be the same. As westskipper said he prefered the "after". Like I said thats a personal thing.

One that is aesthetically pleasing
One that women prefer(in my experience)

At this point I either switch off or think BS. "aesthetically pleasing"? I say cultural fetish. And that's entirely the case. No amount of debate will change that. Plus I could say "I prefer a woman with a tidy pussy, bald, no big inner labia, cos that's gross you know". I actually say the day I think that is the day I will remove myself from civilised society. For it's own good.

I also say, guess what? This is the same BS those morons who practice FGM say.

And this whole thing about getting it done to fit in or to look like a pornstar, so what? It's not you they're doing it too. The same could be said about tattoos or piercings? I know first hand one of my mates who was circumcised for years who's called jew-knob by the boys, I'm sure he sometimes wished he had a foreskin to "fit-in", equally true to the american kid who's called hoodie or whatever, I'm sure he'd like to fit-in.

If someone is undergoing a procedure on his knob(or for a lady, her vag) to "fit in" IMHO they need to see a shrink, looong before they need to engage with a surgeon. Plus if you're comparing the removal of an entire foreskin to a tattoo or piercing I feel that you've kinda made my point at least somewhat about the fetish/cultural aspect.



*a fair few docs in the family and some I wouldn't trust to tie a shoelace, so maybe I'm more paranoid than most

Nip The Tip

Wibbs wrote: »

Some cut guys on this thread have said they can jerk off with a dry hand, that to me as an intact man would be :eek::eek::eek:. That right there tells me sensitivity is seriously effin reduced. That is something no amount of studies suggesting otherwise are gonna be believable to me personally.

Actually no. To be fair? It tells me sensitivity would be seriously reduced for me if I could do that. And I love that sensitivity, that nuance of touch. It does not mean another man would be the same. As westskipper said he prefered the "after". Like I said thats a personal thing.

Well to me only the second point here is fair.
I know what you mean about jacking off with a dry hand when "intact", I had a "fully functional" penis for years. Right now, if the head is moist from whatever, it is still ":eek::eek::eek:". Which is why I said it must be completely dry, or well lubed, no middle ground.
I'll bet if you retract your skin and let it dry out you could whack (without rolling the foreskin back & forth) comfortably!!

4skin

Right lads I don't want to drag this thread into an argument, and I'm sorry if that's what I started so I'll just stop on about it now.

With respect Wibbs, and shoot me down for saying this but I just don't think your opinion is as valid as others due to the fact that you have not had a circumcision. I know you know your stuff to an extent which is great but personally I just feel your in no position to be pontificating about these things. It would be like having a driving instructer who has never actually driven, but knows all the ins and outs of the rulebook.

That's just what I think, I have no agenda here and aren't trying to stir trouble but that's just how I feel.

Camilo

Wibbs wrote: »

ask her about this, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preputioplasty you get to keep your bits with all the function and sod all aesthetic change. That link suggests it requires more surgical skill than average(and more than the full snip that's for sure) so maybe that's why it's not given as an alternative?

I went for my circumcision 3 months ago and was asking the doctors if it were possible to get a preputioplasty instead. They were confused and had never heard of it, neither did my GP. i had to print off a sheet of information on the proceedure for them to read!

Preputioplasty is not(for the most part) available or known of in Ireland,

Zipppy

Stu wrote: »

Well, i was told i need a full circumcision after a failed Frenuloplasty even though i don't have a tight foreskin. The urologist in my opinion is not doing his job properly by giving me misinformation when i only need, and will be having a Frenectomy instead. Less work for him and i get to keep my foreskin but i had to argue my case with him :rolleyes: and he eventually agreed to do a Frenectomy (i'll be getting it done in less than 2 months).

I get the impression that my urologist didn't want to lose face when i told him i wanted a Frenectomy because he knows best and who am i to question his expert judgement even though its my body and a decision i have to live with for the rest of my life.

Fair play to the guys who are happy with the Circ but many of you guys only needed a Frenectomy or partial circumcision and only in the most severe of cases is a full circumcision needed and this is the very pertinent point Wibbs has been making.

Without labouring the point, the foreskin has a function so the more you keep of it, the better. A fully retractable foreskin via a partial circ is better than no foreskin. For those of you planning on getting a full Circumcision, have a read of this first.

http://www.nocirc.org/touch-test/touchtest.php

I'm in on the 5th May but am intending making an appointment with my urologist next week to 'talk this through again'

Kinda would like to keep as much as I can ... I do have a 'tight band' but would love to keep 'some' foreskin....as I've said earlier I'm afraid of having all too tight after op.....

Hopefully he'll agree...

What exactly is a partial circ?????

Zip

Wibbs

Camilo wrote: »

I went for my circumcision 3 months ago and was asking the doctors if it were possible to get a preputioplasty instead. They were confused and had never heard of it, neither did my GP. i had to print off a sheet of information on the proceedure for them to read!

Preputioplasty is not(for the most part) available or known of in Ireland,

And right there is just one reason why I'd put good money Irish men are walking around without a foreskin when they quite simply didn't need to have it removed. That to me is bloody ridiculous, lazy and frankly incompetent if the doctor in question has the title of urologist. That's his or her job folks. So forgive me if I sometimes :rolleyes: when I hear too much of "the doctor knows best you know".

Zipppy wrote:

Hopefully he'll agree...

Hopefully? Eh Zippy with respect if he doesn't agree, get another doctor who will. It's your body, not his.

What exactly is a partial circ?????

I'd ask your doctor and again if you don't get an answer or are dismissed, scrape him off and get another opinion. You can always get another opinion.

4skin wrote:

With respect Wibbs, and shoot me down for saying this but I just don't think your opinion is as valid as others due to the fact that you have not had a circumcision. I know you know your stuff to an extent which is great but personally I just feel your in no position to be pontificating about these things. It would be like having a driving instructer who has never actually driven, but knows all the ins and outs of the rulebook.

I completely take your point 4skin. The main reason I chimed in on this was it was terribly one sided at one point and as you can see from Camilo's experience there appears to be a lack of info among some who should know better. I would also have an issue with the practice on newborn baby boys. Like I've said for medical reasons clearly men here have had good results and fair play.

I will say this if, heavens forfend my foreskin goes dodgy(it could happen diabetes etc), there is no way in hell I'd seek medical advice on the matter in this country going by what a fair few men(and a mate of mine) have reported.

Zipppy

Wibbs wrote: »

Hopefully? Eh Zippy with respect if he doesn't agree, get another doctor who will. It's your body, not his.
I'd ask your doctor and again if you don't get an answer or are dismissed, scrape him off and get another opinion. You can always get another opinion.

Such good advice....you are of course perfectly correct Thansk

westskipper

Stu wrote: »

Well, i was told i need a full circumcision after a failed Frenuloplasty even though i don't have a tight foreskin. The urologist in my opinion is not doing his job properly by giving me misinformation when i only need, and will be having a Frenectomy instead. Less work for him and i get to keep my foreskin but i had to argue my case with him :rolleyes: and he eventually agreed to do a Frenectomy (i'll be getting it done in less than 2 months).

I get the impression that my urologist didn't want to lose face when i told him i wanted a Frenectomy because he knows best and who am i to question his expert judgement even though its my body and a decision i have to live with for the rest of my life.

Fair play to the guys who are happy with the Circ but many of you guys only needed a Frenectomy or partial circumcision and only in the most severe of cases is a full circumcision needed and this is the very pertinent point Wibbs has been making.

Without labouring the point, the foreskin has a function so the more you keep of it, the better. A fully retractable foreskin via a partial circ is better than no foreskin. For those of you planning on getting a full Circumcision, have a read of this first.

http://www.nocirc.org/touch-test/touchtest.php

Interestingly enough, i found another paper published by the same peer-review journal (BJU) recently which contradicts that finding completely and comes to the opposite conclusion....that circumcision has no effect on penile sensitivity....Kigozi et al. The effect of male circumcision on sexual satisfaction and function, results from a randomized trial of male circumcision for human immunodeficiency virus prevention. Rakai, Uganda. BJU International. Volume 101, pp 65-70. January 2008.

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

S0....all depends on what study you choose to support your own point of view.....and who funds it....

Nip The Tip

westskipper wrote: »

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

+ 1!

LegacyUser

I am in my forties and I had to get the circumcision. It is a relief to be able to pee in public toilets without dribbling all over myself, normally I would sit down to pee. It was sore and uncomfortable for 5 days. The most painful bit is the night time erections. These soon pass. Sex has never been as good both solo and intercourse. It is personal choice, if it does not feel right check it out with your doc. Each to their own but I have no regrets what so ever. I had the operation 10 weeks ago. I wish I had got the operation when I was in my teens. I suffered with tears and scars on the tip. Eventually the hole was that small peeing was restricted. I wish anybody who is considering it all the best. Anyone that is not suffering you do not know what your talking about.

scared_silly

westskipper wrote: »

I had mine done under local anaesthetic also. Its fine, you can feel nothing, your are lying down or reclined, so you see nothing, you can close your eyes or stare at the ceiling, or chat to the doc, Its all fine, and you can walk away with none of the affects of a general.

my personal advice re style is get the cut fairly high and fairly tight - too low and you lose some sensation, too loose and it will annoy you as it will sag and half cover your glans when soft, which is neither one thing or another. You dont have to get a dramatic tight cut, but if you are getting circumcised you might as well get it done properly rather than partially, otherwise you may end up getting it redone to tighten it up in a few months....

Hi Westskipper,

Thanks for the feedback. I dont really understand what you mean get cut fairly high and tight...

By high i presume the removal of the foreskin is at the highest point (leaving the most foreskin), basically just removing the tight band but then you would be able to cover the glands when soft which i think contradicts your statement about too low and loose, sorry i'm a bit confused.



I'm getting the Op done next week, so i want to be prepared and buy stuff i will need now. So far i've bought a few Playstation games and dvds to pass the time of recovery. People were talking about having salt baths to speed up the recovery process...

Whats the type of salts people get?
Bandages: i presume there are no willy shaped bandages...so what types of bandages should i get?

Any other recomendations to help the healing process?


Also, on the day of the circ, what underwear should i wear? loose boxers or tight underwear so the fella wont be moving around?

Zipppy

scared_silly wrote: »

Hi Westskipper,

I'm getting the Op done next week, so i want to be prepared and buy stuff i will need now. So far i've bought a few Playstation games and dvds to pass the time of recovery. People were talking about having salt baths to speed up the recovery process...

Playstation games??? I'm hoping to be back out on my motorbike in a couple of days afterwards......with my man all wrapped up obviously :rolleyes:

Camilo

scared_silly wrote: »

I'm getting the Op done next week, so i want to be prepared and buy stuff i will need now. So far i've bought a few Playstation games and dvds to pass the time of recovery. People were talking about having salt baths to speed up the recovery process...

Whats the type of salts people get?
Bandages: i presume there are no willy shaped bandages...so what types of bandages should i get?

Any other recomendations to help the healing process?


Also, on the day of the circ, what underwear should i wear? loose boxers or tight underwear so the fella wont be moving around?

If i may interfere i would advise you to not use salts, in the past they were deemed to be beneficial but now they are viewed to be slightly harmful to the healing process if anything.

I would reccomend tight(ish) undies, smear vaseline on the cotton gauze when you wrap up the chap and have him nice and secure.

Good luck man and welcome to the brotherhood

LegacyUser

I'm wondering, has anyone had any success with stretching the forskin instead of circumcision?
In my own experience, Up until recently i could not retract my forskin when either flaccid or erect. With some time spent stretching i can now retract when flaccid no problem. At first, my glans was extremely sensitive when exposed but now it's fine.
Unfortunately I cannot yet retract the skin easily when erect. I've heard about a cream that can be got on prescription that supposedly helps.
I'm reluctant to go for the snip

westskipper

scared_silly wrote: »

Hi Westskipper,

Thanks for the feedback. I dont really understand what you mean get cut fairly high and tight...

By high i presume the removal of the foreskin is at the highest point (leaving the most foreskin), basically just removing the tight band but then you would be able to cover the glands when soft which i think contradicts your statement about too low and loose, sorry i'm a bit confused.



I'm getting the Op done next week, so i want to be prepared and buy stuff i will need now. So far i've bought a few Playstation games and dvds to pass the time of recovery. People were talking about having salt baths to speed up the recovery process...

Whats the type of salts people get?
Bandages: i presume there are no willy shaped bandages...so what types of bandages should i get?

Any other recomendations to help the healing process?


Also, on the day of the circ, what underwear should i wear? loose boxers or tight underwear so the fella wont be moving around?

Hi,

Just to help with the explanations of high/low, tight/loose etc....

a circumcision is the excision and removal of 2" - 3" 'sleeve' of foreskin and the subsequent suturing (stitching) of the cut ends together so that the over all foreskin is shorter than the original, which means that the glans will be uncovered at least partially all of the time.

a HIGH cut is when the 'sleeve' of foreskin removed contains mostly outer foreskin and very little inner foreskin. Therefore the scar where the two cut ends were joined will appear 'high' on the penis, probably 1 1/2 to 2 inches away from the sulcus (the circular groove behind the glans).

A LOW cut is the opposite - mainly inner foreskin is removed and very little outer foreskin is removed, therefore the scar appears very low onthe penis, just behind the sulcus.

A LOOSE cut is when the surgeon doesnt remove a lot of foreskin, so after the cut ends are joined again, there is still some loose foreskin - at least when flaccid - which will wrinkle and bunch up a bit, and possible cover some of the glans. If this is quite loose,some people call this a partial circ.

a TIGHT cut is when the surgeon removes a greater amount of skin so that when rejoined there is very little 'slack' foreskin, even when flaccid, and therefore the foreskin is pulled back tight and leaves the glans and sulcus fully exposed at all times. When erect, the foreskin is pulled very tight and smooth and the glans is very prominent. this is the classic 'porn star' appearance.

You can have any combination of high/low style with tight/loose cut, but be sure the surgeon knows of your preference before the op - it cant be changed afterwards !!

The general consensus of most men that have been circumcised in adult life and have shared their experience on various websites (and have therefore known life as 'intact previously as a comparison) is that high is better than low, because with a low cut you lose nearly all your most sensitive inner foreskin. Outer foreskin is not very sensitive at all, but low cuts are performed sometimes because cosmetically some people think they look neater, with the scar nearly invisible at the end instead of the middle of the penis.

Additonally, many men will tell you to avoid getting a loose cut, go for a tighter cut as it is more satisfying and feels better, more masculine. Some people would argue it looks better, as loose cuts can get 'saggy' looking and may cure phimosis but still have to be pulled back for urination and daily washing etc, so only confer some of the advantages of the tighter 'traditional' cicumcision (that may be an american term really).

> To Clarify this point about washing, i'm not saying that you dont need to wash a tightly cut penis, but rather you dont get any smegma buildup with a tight cut, as there is no where for smegma to accumulate, everything is exposed to the air all of the time - hence you get less 'odour' issues with a tight cut....so personal hygeine is improved somewhat....


a Tight cut doesnt mean you lose any extra sexual sensitivity so long as it is combined with a HIGH cut line, as all you have lost is extra outer foreskin, which doesnt add to sexual sensitivity anyway.

Once you have ANY foreskin removed, you have modified your penis and therefore it will not be the same again - therefore you owe it to yourself to try to get the best finished result possible. Loose (partial) circumcisions may cure a phimosis but they give you a half foreskin, which half covers your glans, which is not necessarily better than a tight cut...and foreskin will stretch over time as you age anyway.

one last point - I was told by my surgeon NOT to use salt baths, or disinfectants / antispetics, as they slow down the healing process, likewise he said not to bind the penis in bandages, but to let the air at the scar site as much as possible, that this would encourage a scab and more rapid healing....just wear fairly tight briefs and use surgical sterile would pads to protect it from chafing / bleeding slightly against the underwear. Within 3 days or so it will ooze no more, then you can stop using the pads and just use vaseline or nutrogena to keep the scar line moist and soft while it heals

The very best of luck to you mate, let us know how you get on !!
ps you ARE doing the right thing !

rolandweary

Well lads, thought it was worth my while registering for this. Had the operation under local anesthetic this morning (for medical reasons) and just back home now. All seems to have gone well. The operation itself was kinda strange and uncomfortable at times (lots of gritting of teeth) but in hindsight not bad at all. Was able to walk out of the hospital no problem.

So just sitting here now with himself hanging out, albeit wrapped up. Theres some pain alright but nothing unbearable. Half considering going for a celebratory pint this evening, foolish?

Just wanted to acknowledge how helpful this thread has been. As many have said the whole thing might seem daunting but once you've committed yourself to going through with it it's nowhere near as bad as you'd expect. Off work until next week so hoping that will be enough to get over the worst of it. If anyone's interested I can give updates on how the recovery is going.

Funky G

Hi all,

I'm going in next week for a consultation on the bald headed champion....

It looks like i have torn my "banjo string" - torn my frenulum breve but also I have experienced a tightness around the middle part of my penis when erect, which I think could result in a preputioplasty.

I'm not in any major pain - just a slight discomfort with my frenulum breve which looks like it's been partially cut with no bleeding or anything else coming from it. But over the years the middle area of my penis has been tight, tears now and again, and is uncomfortable, hence the possibility of a preputioplasty.

Any recommendations on what to ask for when i go in to the consultation?

Many thanks to west skipper for trying to explain the high / low cut difference etc, but i am still at loggerheads over what to ask or go for. But the point is i don't want a full circumcision. I want to keep as much of the feeling and look of my penis as possible.

Your help would be great here.

Thanks.

G.

Iderown

Be honest at the consultation, FunkyG. Point out your (two?) problems. Ask if they can be dealt with in the most conservative manner. That may involve gentle stretching.

If you are already at the surgery option stage, then again be honest. Maybe saying something like, "How would it be if only this narrow band were removed?" or, "Is it possible to cut the frenulum so that it becomes a bit longer?"