PDA

View Full Version : Difference between uncircumcised and after foreskin restoration.


Just a tourist
September 25th, 2009, 10:54
Difference between these two. (Minor or major).
eg: Does foreskin restoration return the head moisture like uncircumcised?

Tally
September 25th, 2009, 12:05
Difference between these two. (Minor or major).
eg: Does foreskin restoration return the head moisture like uncircumcised?
What is the difference between an intact penis and one with a restored foreskin?

Both will give the owner the gliding experience during masturbation and sex. I am not yet finished and my masturbation technique has changed to be more like that of an intact guy.

Both will allow the glans to be in a mucosal state. The inner foreskin and the glans are mucous membranes. When they are protected by a foreskin, they will be smooth, shiny, and sensitive because they will not be covered with a layer of keratin. After several months of keeping my glans covered by retaining, my glans is more sensitive than I ever remember and it is looking more like the pictures I see of intact guys.

z726
September 25th, 2009, 12:46
The only really noticeable difference is that the inner lining of an intact foreskin is tethered to a spot underneath the glans by a frenulum, and that the band of tissue surrounding the glans at that point can be a bit tighter than in a restored foreskin. Otherwise, from what I know they're pretty much similar in appearance and function.

greg_b
September 25th, 2009, 19:02
Very few men have experienced both, so it is hard to come to conclusions. Most that I have heard from say there is a difference, but they make the differences in appearance and skin covering the glans as fairly minor. The original equipment is shinier, moister, the skin keeps the glans covered a bit tighter, goes back into position over the glans more spontaneously, things like that.

On the other hand, most also say that their sexual feeling is markedly not as good as it was with their original foreskin. But it is way better than it was without a foreskin.

Why do you ask?

Just a tourist
September 26th, 2009, 02:31
Just curious.

*Hoping for more reply from both guys and women. (feels, texture, confidence, physical and mentally, anything that can be notice...)

Someone mundane
September 26th, 2009, 06:42
Well, I haven't seriously started yet, and I've only been reading, but it has been quite extensive. Just throwing that out there to start with for those whom would complain based on prior postings of mine if I didn't... I have no problem admitting to things. Simply being wary of the uptight.

Now, anyway... I'm cut, (Since my very first day here on earth, actually... Nice welcoming present.) so bear this in mind when I describe the following.

Feels, texture: Intact or no, skin would feel pretty much like skin I'd imagine either way. A cut man has less skin in general. He may feel tighter. One who is restored/intact has a lot more skin, so you could likely expect both to feel much more plushy in highly similar ways. The inner skin (mucosa) in an intact penis would quite possibly feel thinner, with more of a velvet (BUT, just encase, probably moist instead from all the enclosed oil secretions if it has not been exposed to air very long) texture to it. When it comes to the velvet feel, I've actually noticed this myself even in my own mucosa remnants to an extent when it is dry and pulled taut. Also, when I grab hold of a piece of the mucosa just above the scar line in a fashion that also scoops up a bit of regular shaft skin on the other side, and if I squeeze it together from both sides while rolling my fingers... I seem to be able to feel the mucosa and shaft skin separately in between themselves. One part just feels less girthy in general, while the other; shaft skin, feels like it has more substance and is fleshier in general. Maybe I'm not putting it right, try it sometime for yourself to see what I mean.

When it comes to an intact one, though... Since everything has had the chance to form naturally, I believe an intact one would probably be slightly thinner and more fine overall. probably springier as others have said and a better recovery mechanism too since most of that was, at one point ravaged in a restored man. But you do have to remember that ALL people are different. Even intact, foreskins appear to come in many forms. Some thin, some thicker, some tight, some loose... I imagine that "springiness" would also vary. In the face of this, if a restored one is generally thicker and looser just as a minor trend/feature, does it really matter? Personally, I don't think it does. Just my opinion. Unfortunately though, the frenulum may be damaged in some way in a restored one and this is not something current restoration can address it seems. On the upside though, it appears that if a remnant of the structure does exist, it too can be tensioned to expand/grow. As a result, this would (likely) lead to more of a surface area for frenulum stimulation. Unless you want to endure yet more surgical butchery and scarring, (perhaps to tighten/tether it somehow) it would likely still be useless when it comes to it's mechanism of holding the foreskin forwards. In a restored man that's usually gone.

Carrying on in the spirit of Greg_B's post, to give balance to it I have also heard of testimony where people with similar experiences (those having lost the original equipment then restored) say that there is virtually no difference aside from the springiness or recovery mechanisms not being as quick. And I could logically see why. Although... As the bottom line, I guess you could simply say that everyone's body will react differently and we will all have our own opinions. I could be wrong on some things, right on others. I'm no scientist, but here's my input anyways for the sake of variety.

Yunus
September 26th, 2009, 08:06
The only really noticeable difference is that the inner lining of an intact foreskin is tethered to a spot underneath the glans by a frenulum, and that the band of tissue surrounding the glans at that point can be a bit tighter than in a restored foreskin. Otherwise, from what I know they're pretty much similar in appearance and function.

But,sometimes circumcision didn't remove frenulum.
Males whose frenulum wasn't removed completely are very lucky.

Yunus
September 26th, 2009, 08:56
Here is what I feel being natural intact male :

I feel "booming" feeling in my intact penis.I feel very good in my intact penis too.
My glans is very smooth,shiny,sensitive,& moisturized with very pink color when I retract my foreskin.
My glans really seems like be well-taken-care.
I feel really sensitive in my glans when my glans is touched,maybe it is because my glans' sensitive feeling is supplied by frenulum.
I can do gliding mechanism too,some experts said that is a bonus mechanism for intercourse.
I realized that my foreskin is the main part of sensitivity,my foreskin & frenulum are more sensitive than my glans.

My desire can be raised so easily by myself,but I can restrict or control that desire easily too.

Because my environment didn't like intact penis,sometimes I feel depressed living with circumcised males around me (I live in Indonesia).
But,sometimes I feel proud because I feel that I'm the intact one in my environment.
It is very hard to find other intact males in my country.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

matty200
September 28th, 2009, 08:45
I am intact too l live in the UK which is mostly l think is uncircumsized and im happy being the way i am i did have a short foreskin once before but decided to do some stretching with the tlc and manual stretching that has helped a lot.When l had a short skin my glans felt pretty dry and uncomforable.

Yunus
September 28th, 2009, 08:50
How long is the natural normal foreskin?

I have foreskin which full-covered my glans & there is around 1-2 mm more of my foreskin size after my glans is full-covered by it.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

greg_b
September 28th, 2009, 17:15
It varies.

Here is a good site to see some variations:

http://www.circumstitions.com/Gallery.html

Cheers!

Bashar
September 28th, 2009, 17:43
But,sometimes circumcision didn't remove frenulum.
Males whose frenulum wasn't removed completely are very lucky.

that's interesting to me Yunus. i'm trying to figure out if mine as removed or not because i don't know what i've never experienced and since you're an intact male perhaps you could check out my process thread and tell me if i do? i know there's something about the center of my head that doesn't feel like the rest but am really not sure. there's also a few VERY sensitive areas of remaining foreskin on my scar which i am anticipating to be 3 times the length. hopefully with all sensation intact across that length :)

cobra
September 28th, 2009, 23:21
Bashar, you seem to have alot of fren tissue remaining. Like many men, I'm sure it is somewhat damaged, as there is alot of tearing involved with baby circumcisions.

When a baby is born, his foreskin is fused to the glans. Before they can cut the foreskin off, the doctor uses a probe to rip the inner mucosa away from the glans. This causes some tearing in the frenelum as well, as the foreskin is separated and stretched up onto the cutting bell for the snip.

Depending on how much skin is pulled up and where the cut is made, you can have quite a bit of inner skin, frenelum and maybe even some ridged band remaining. Frenelum is easy to see, as it looks like spagetti strands of skin coming down from the frenar delta (that area below the pee hole that looks like a butt). The inner skin is likewise easy to see, as it is the lighter colored skin above your scar line. The ridged band is not visible. It can only be checked by touch. Simply stroke the skin on the top side of the shaft around your scar area. If it is erogenous, you have some remaing foreskin tissue there. If it just feels like regular skin, you do not. The ridged band is usually removed, but there is not a clear demarcation line between regular shaft skin and ridged band skin. It is a gradation that runs from sexual tissue to normal skin the further down the shaft you go. Ridged band is really just the trailing ends of your frenelum as it wraps around the shaft, used to help sphincter the tip of the foreskin closed if you are cold or scared or active.

Although I have heard some guys claim the ridged band is the most sensitive part of the intact penis, others claim the glans or fren is... so I don't worry about it too much. There is alot of variation in penises. Some intact men have hardly any frenelum or ridged band tissue anyway, just naturally.

The biggest thing is just having a mobile and soft sheath of skin to slide up and down the glans. People seem to overlook that cause they worry about the fren or ridged band so much. You know how good it feels to have a nice, moist, warm mouth slide over your dick? That's how a foreskin feels when you slide it up and down over the glans. Now imagine that feeling while you're fucking a pussy.

you can worry about fren and ridged band all day, but any advanced restorer will tell you it's that slinky, slidey skin that feels the best. You can stretch it side to side and pop the head in and out, squeeze the end shut and let the glans harden inside it and stretch it, twist it lightly back and forth, put a wet finger inside it and rub your fren and swirl it all around. Foreskin isn't the wrapper, it's the candy!

Yunus
September 29th, 2009, 01:00
that's interesting to me Yunus. i'm trying to figure out if mine as removed or not because i don't know what i've never experienced and since you're an intact male perhaps you could check out my process thread and tell me if i do? i know there's something about the center of my head that doesn't feel like the rest but am really not sure. there's also a few VERY sensitive areas of remaining foreskin on my scar which i am anticipating to be 3 times the length. hopefully with all sensation intact across that length :)

Here is the link of frenulum picture :
http://img333.imageshack.us/img333/170/frenlum15fr.jpg

I think that you still have your frenulum,but your frenulum seems different than mine.
I think that your frenulum isn't complete because circumcision remove some parts of your frenulum only.
My frenulum has wider area than yours,it seems like the line under my tongue.

Yunus
September 29th, 2009, 01:13
Bashar, you seem to have alot of fren tissue remaining. Like many men, I'm sure it is somewhat damaged, as there is alot of tearing involved with baby circumcisions.

When a baby is born, his foreskin is fused to the glans. Before they can cut the foreskin off, the doctor uses a probe to rip the inner mucosa away from the glans. This causes some tearing in the frenelum as well, as the foreskin is separated and stretched up onto the cutting bell for the snip.

Depending on how much skin is pulled up and where the cut is made, you can have quite a bit of inner skin, frenelum and maybe even some ridged band remaining. Frenelum is easy to see, as it looks like spagetti strands of skin coming down from the frenar delta (that area below the pee hole that looks like a butt). The inner skin is likewise easy to see, as it is the lighter colored skin above your scar line. The ridged band is not visible. It can only be checked by touch. Simply stroke the skin on the top side of the shaft around your scar area. If it is erogenous, you have some remaing foreskin tissue there. If it just feels like regular skin, you do not. The ridged band is usually removed, but there is not a clear demarcation line between regular shaft skin and ridged band skin. It is a gradation that runs from sexual tissue to normal skin the further down the shaft you go. Ridged band is really just the trailing ends of your frenelum as it wraps around the shaft, used to help sphincter the tip of the foreskin closed if you are cold or scared or active.

Although I have heard some guys claim the ridged band is the most sensitive part of the intact penis, others claim the glans or fren is... so I don't worry about it too much. There is alot of variation in penises. Some intact men have hardly any frenelum or ridged band tissue anyway, just naturally.

The biggest thing is just having a mobile and soft sheath of skin to slide up and down the glans. People seem to overlook that cause they worry about the fren or ridged band so much. You know how good it feels to have a nice, moist, warm mouth slide over your dick? That's how a foreskin feels when you slide it up and down over the glans. Now imagine that feeling while you're fucking a pussy.

you can worry about fren and ridged band all day, but any advanced restorer will tell you it's that slinky, slidey skin that feels the best. You can stretch it side to side and pop the head in and out, squeeze the end shut and let the glans harden inside it and stretch it, twist it lightly back and forth, put a wet finger inside it and rub your fren and swirl it all around. Foreskin isn't the wrapper, it's the candy!

As far as I know,circumcision always removed ridge band.Circumcision made new "ridge band" called circumcision scar which is said really sensitive part of the circumcised penis by circumcised guys.

Yes,I noticed that my ridge band is much sensitive.
But,it seems that all parts of my inner foreskin included glans are really sensitive.

As far as I know,circumcised glans had hardened membrane like the outer penis skin & it made circumcised glans is less sensitive that intact glans.
I feel really strange feeling (sensitive feeling) at my glans when it is touched.

Bashar
September 29th, 2009, 01:42
Yunus: i think my frenulum grew as much as it could for me so ya it makes sense that it looks different. glad i have one though, phew...

Cobra: thanks a lot for your posts man. your info's been really helpful for me and i usually learn a thing or two i didn't know before from each post.

getting down to it (no pun intended) i think the damage has been done to the fren much like you said. i also did what you said about feeling around the scar and there are some spots that are very erogenous they make my internal muscles contract.

i'm curious about what system the body has for regenerating nerves. if this erogenous skin is stretched will i develop new skin that's just as erogenous over the entire length or is the sensitivity dissipated, so to speak, over what will be my fully restored foreskin? in other words, are new nerve endings created like the ones on the erogenous bits or are they altered to compensate for the new skin?

i'm also wondering how the fren is affected by all of this. when you tug does the the bottom of the fren (furthest from the hole) become the top or is it too far up to flip?

Yunus
September 29th, 2009, 01:58
Yunus: i think my frenulum grew as much as it could for me so ya it makes sense that it looks different. glad i have one though, phew...

Cobra: thanks a lot for your posts man. your info's been really helpful for me and i usually learn a thing or two i didn't know before from each post.

getting down to it (no pun intended) i think the damage has been done to the fren much like you said. i also did what you said about feeling around the scar and there are some spots that are very erogenous they make my internal muscles contract.

i'm curious about what system the body has for regenerating nerves. if this erogenous skin is stretched will i develop new skin that's just as erogenous over the entire length or is the sensitivity dissipated, so to speak, over what will be my fully restored foreskin? in other words, are new nerve endings created like the ones on the erogenous bits or are they altered to compensate for the new skin?

i'm also wondering how the fren is affected by all of this. when you tug does the the bottom of the fren (furthest from the hole) become the top or is it too far up to flip?

As far as I know,the broken nerves which was cut at circumcision can't be full-healed like natural penis nerves although it was restored on foreskin restoration.
The circumcised nerves won't be as good as intact nerves.

Good luck for your restoration,Bro,

matty200
September 29th, 2009, 02:35
Mine is a bit longer than it used to be.

Yunus
September 29th, 2009, 02:36
Mine is a bit longer than it used to be.

What is longer?

cobra
September 29th, 2009, 04:21
There's no such thing as broken nerves. Also, the nerve cells which develop among the expanded tissue work just as good as the original nerves, if not better since they are newly formed. Bashar, the skin tissue you tension will basically produce a cloned counterpart right next to it. What happens when you tension a cell is that it becomes elongated. The cell senses this distortion and splits in two in order to alleviate the stress. It's alot more complex than that and involves chemical messages passing through the extra-cellular matrix and stem cells in the bottom layer of the epidermis-- even scientists haven't figured it all out yet. But we do know that the process is started when the skin cells are distorted by the stretching, and protein messengers circulate though the extra-cellular matrix waking up the skin's basal stem cells and causing them to activate and pitch in, differentiating into skin, glands, circulatory structures, nerve endings and whatnot.

It's kind of like a woman getting pregnant... as her belly grows, tension begins to distort the skin cells of her stomach. The epidermis says "Uh, oh, we need more skin or we're going to tear!" So it begins to produce skin cells at an accellerated rate so that more skin cells are being produced than there are skin cells dying off. In order for her new skin to survive it needs blood, so veins and cappillaries form to feed blood to the tissue. We also need to maintain temp and sensation, so sweat glands and nerve endings also form.

It's the same thing with the penis. As we stretch the skin mechanically, the epidermis says, "What the frick-- this dick is getting longer! We need more skin or its going to bust!" So the skin cells begin to split, and nerves and capillaries and all that. Since it is foreskin cells splitting, we get more foreskin cells. It wouldn't make sense to grow ass skin on our dicks, so the body makes more dick skin, with all the correct nerve endings and glands and whatnot. What you get mainly depends on what you are tensioning. It's really just our limited human capacity to regenerate like a lizard growing a new tail. We cannot regenerate compex structures, but we can expand in a generalized nature, so what we get is areas of foreskin tissue, but we don't regrow the frenelum or ridged band structures even if we do get some of that tissue and nerve endings.

greg_b
September 29th, 2009, 05:29
Nice post, Cobra! Great way to explain it!

Regards

Unregistered
October 6th, 2009, 19:35
well you do lose the feeling of your foreskin moving back and forth as well being circumcised you do lose some nerve endings and it takes longer to masturbate plus having to use a lot of lube. so you might get some results back restoring your foreskin but it would not be like the original

Joseph
October 6th, 2009, 22:02
I think the only person that can truly answer this question is somebody who has felt what it was like to have a foreskin, circumcised at a fairly late age, and decided to restore.

I know of a few guys on here who have had such an experience... would they please speak up?

I can only give an objective opinion. Please keep in mind I'm intact and have been so my whole life, so I speak from that perspective:

I would imagine that it would be different for each case, as there are different circumcisions as there are penises. e.g, high cut, low cut, tight cut, loose cut, and the various combinations of these.

The kind of circumcision you had will have bearing on where your scar is, (if it's that prominent), how much mucosa you have and where it will be, how much skin you had to begin with, whether or not you were left with a frenulum, etc...

For these reasons, I must say that a restored foreskin can't ever be exactly as if it were never circumcised, and so there will be noticeable differences; like the size and shape of your penis, and pretty much any other part of your body (ie, your nose, your fingers, your ears, etc...) this is just something that you're going to have to come to accept.

Some guys might actually restore a foreskin that quite similar in appearance and function in that of a penis that was never circumcised, but again, it all depends on our circumcision, and possibly your restoration methods.

From what I've seen in these forums, though, you can come real close.

I've seen really crazy restorations, where men who had a bare mushroom shaft achieve the entire coverage of their glans. Since a restored foreskin also keeps moisture, the glans does become dekeratinized and restored men gain quite a lot of shine. And due to the dekeratinization of the glans, men report gaining back a lot of sensitivity.

So from my perspective, it looks like a circumcised man can gain back a lot. I think it is a lie to tell a person that it is "exactly the same" as never having been circumcised, because the likelihood of inevitable difference in appearance and function is high(this is a bone of contention between myself and other restorers on here), but this shouldn't discourage a man from restoring.

You can gain a whole lot back,and some guys don't even look like they were ever circumcised.

Check out the galleries and talk to the men on here.

Cheers...

Someone mundane
October 8th, 2009, 10:45
So from my perspective, it looks like a circumcised man can gain back a lot. I think it is a lie to tell a person that it is "exactly the same" as never having been circumcised, because the likelihood of inevitable difference in appearance and function is high(this is a bone of contention between myself and other restorers on here), but this shouldn't discourage a man from restoring.

I would actually agree with this part myself. The only thing that conflicts is testimony where cut then restored people say the sensation is pretty much identical... This leaves me to thinking it's likely for some aspects to this all to be far more holistic than the parts themselves alone. (But, it's possible for there to be lies too. But I'd hope not. What could be gained from lying there? And, of course they could have also just gotten a nice cut where not much was lost.) There is a lot about the body still not yet understood. It seems amazingly complicated on all the deep-in technicalities, but then on the surface the function is rather simple and plain...

Joseph
October 8th, 2009, 14:02
I would actually agree with this part myself. The only thing that conflicts is testimony where cut then restored people say the sensation is pretty much identical... This leaves me to thinking it's likely for some aspects to this all to be far more holistic than the parts themselves alone. (But, it's possible for there to be lies too. But I'd hope not. What could be gained from lying there? And, of course they could have also just gotten a nice cut where not much was lost.) There is a lot about the body still not yet understood. It seems amazingly complicated on all the deep-in technicalities, but then on the surface the function is rather simple and plain...

This is why I think the guys should speak up.

I've only heard of ONE guy trying to say that "it's not that different."

What is to be gained there?

There seems to be this attitude of wanting to belittle the damage and wrongness of circumcision and "getting on with one's life," and all. I think it's the same apathetic attitude that surrounds circumcised men who are "over" their circumcisions; they simply don't want to see circumcision for the big deal that it is and keep it trivial in their own little world.

To each their own, and whatever floats each others' boats.

Just like there are enough guys sucking it up and admitting that they're losing sensation, and that they feel violated for being circumcised, despite the number of guys saying "they're over it," I think we need talk to a whole lot more guys who chose to circumcise at adults.

I don't believe for a second that "it's about the same." If not "unnoticeable." I raise my eyebrow when I know for a fact thousands of nerves are lost, and then someone tells me "they can't tell the difference." Not to mention there are all kinds of guys who got cut as babies and then restored and claim huge increases in sensitivity. So other guys get these huge boosts in sensitivity, and these too-cool-for-you guys tell me "there's no difference?" OK... sure.

We need to talk to more restoring guys that circ'ed at a later time in their lives and get a consensus.

peterpink
October 8th, 2009, 14:20
Most men circumcised as adults do so expecting a health, religious or fetish advantage. Usually questionaries are used and these are regarded as crude measures. Obviously men circumcised as adults do not always report ‘no difference’ and there is a significant number who report they are harmed. ‘We found a statistically significant decrease in penile sensation following circumcision in men but our respondents had mixed feelings’ - Fink K.S., Carson C.C., DeVellis R.F., (2002). ‘The poor outcome of circumcision considered by overall satisfaction rates suggests that when we circumcise men, these outcome data should be discussed during the informed consent process’ - Masood, S., et al. (2005).

(I have attached a table that summarizes the latest 7 studies.)

ih8vtec13
October 8th, 2009, 14:35
Personally I feel we should really focus on what we gain rather then what we can't. We can gain most of it back and if you have never know it then the improvement will be a huge differance for the better. A bug part of restoring is learning to cope with what was done to you, looking at the positive changes you have made and let that make you happy. If you think woe this is great , but it could be 10% better if I was uncut you do nothing but cheepen your acomplishments and your increase in sensation.

Someone mundane
October 8th, 2009, 14:40
There seems to be this attitude of wanting to belittle the damage and wrongness of circumcision and "getting on with one's life," and all. I think it's the same apathetic attitude that surrounds circumcised men who are "over" their circumcisions; they simply don't want to see circumcision for the big deal that it is and keep it trivial in their own little world.

I don't believe for a second that "it's about the same." If not "unnoticeable." I raise my eyebrow when I know for a fact thousands of nerves are lost, and then someone tells me "they can't tell the difference." Not to mention there are all kinds of guys who got cut as babies and then restored and claim huge increases in sensitivity. So other guys get these huge boosts in sensitivity, and these too-cool-for-you guys tell me "there's no difference?" OK... sure.

1: Can you blame them? I actually WANT to feel the same way, to consider that in some small way, the differences might not be that tremendous and substantial. But that's just human hopefulness over my unchosen condition, isn't it? I think, ignoring the possibility that there could be a difference is a form of lying to oneself. It really does seem to cut in more than one way considering this. But I'm ready to face cold truth and reality if need be. Though I think there needs to be more critical research still on the facts already established. There is much more to be understood about it all I believe.

2: This... Is where the holistic aspect I mentioned would come in. What if they are telling the truth? Are you open to that possibility too? That it might not all be about the tissues and structures? There are intact men of course that barely enjoy sexuality. And cut ones that go nuts. Despite the losses suffered. There is just too much to bear in mind. Myself personally, being totally open and honest: I love masturbating, and the very thought or idea that something was cut off of the organ capable of giving such pleasures at birth, GREATLY offends and angers me. Worse still that I had no control over it. I can't understand why such practice even exists. It seems like nothing more than a cruel torture. Now, I also have another friend who is intact and he doesn't much seem to care for any of it... It's thoroughly confusing, in light of all the personal differences and natural variation. Because of how it all varies, I doubt that whole "20,000" nerves is also an entirely static and unchanging number. But I think it's safest to say that the main point is, it isn't right to be depriving somebody of an organ that is theirs if healthy and non-threatening. That's just wrong to me, period.

Joseph
October 8th, 2009, 14:57
1: Can you blame them? I actually WANT to feel the same way, to consider that in some small way, the differences might not be that tremendous and substantial. But that's just human hopefulness over my unchosen condition, isn't it? I think, ignoring the possibility that there could be a difference is a form of lying to oneself. It really does seem to cut in more than one way considering this. But I'm ready to face cold truth and reality if need be. Though I think there needs to be more critical research still on the facts already established. There is much more to be understood about it all I believe.

Sure. I can't blame guys who want to NOT be "different." I can also understand the cut guys wanting to act like "it's no biggie" either. Is it a healthy attitude? I think ignorance always does more harm than good IMO.

2: This... Is where the holistic aspect I mentioned would come in. What if they are telling the truth? Are you open to that possibility too? That it might not all be about the tissues and structures? There are intact men of course that barely enjoy sexuality. And cut ones that go nuts. Despite the losses suffered. There is just too much to bear in mind. Myself personally, being totally open and honest: I love masturbating, and the very thought or idea that something was cut off of the organ capable of giving such pleasures at birth, GREATLY offends and angers me. Worse still that I had no control over it. I can't understand why such practice even exists. It seems like nothing more than a cruel torture. Now, I also have another friend who is intact and he doesn't much seem to care for any of it... It's thoroughly confusing, in light of all the personal differences and natural variation. Because of how it all varies, I doubt that whole "20,000" nerves is also an entirely static and unchanging number. But I think it's safest to say that the main point is, it isn't right to be depriving somebody of an organ that is theirs if healthy and non-threatening. That's just wrong to me, period.

I will have to acknowledge that I cannot nor ever will be able to compare my subjective experience with another man's subjective experience.

If a man that circumcised himself as an adult and restores tells me he "doesn't feel a difference," what can I tell him? That his experience isn't real?

I can't.

But that still doesn't mean I won't be skeptical.

*EDIT*
Remember that some guys that get cut as adults report "no difference" as well. Who am I to tell them it's not what they feel?

I'll still be skeptical though.

Joseph
October 8th, 2009, 14:59
Personally I feel we should really focus on what we gain rather then what we can't. We can gain most of it back and if you have never know it then the improvement will be a huge differance for the better. A bug part of restoring is learning to cope with what was done to you, looking at the positive changes you have made and let that make you happy. If you think woe this is great , but it could be 10% better if I was uncut you do nothing but cheepen your acomplishments and your increase in sensation.

EXACTLY.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Someone mundane
October 8th, 2009, 15:14
Sure. I can't blame guys who want to NOT be "different." I can also understand the cut guys wanting to act like "it's no biggie" either. Is it a healthy attitude? I think ignorance always does more harm than good IMO.



I will have to acknowledge that I cannot nor ever will be able to compare my subjective experience with another man's subjective experience.

If a man that circumcised himself as an adult and restores tells me he "doesn't feel a difference," what can I tell him? That his experience isn't real?

I can't.

But that still doesn't mean I won't be skeptical.

I agree with you about ignorance.

As for the rest... Reality, is a very surreal thing indeed. It should be simple and easy to understand, but it's strangely not... I have no idea either, it's tough to believe for me as well but if it's true for them, then... All the better for us restorers I guess. :confused:

Joseph
October 8th, 2009, 15:25
I agree with you about ignorance.

As for the rest... Reality, is a very surreal thing indeed. It should be simple and easy to understand, but it's strangely not... I have no idea either, it's tough to believe for me as well but if it's true for them, then... All the better for us restorers I guess. :confused:

I think that each guy needs to focus on his experience, what sensations HE's getting back, and what restoration means for HIM.

Even among uncut guys, each guy enjoys different sensations and activities with his foreskin. Some guys don't like what others do, and what some guys find pleasing, others find to be nothing at all.

Remember that growing up, guys grow up to have all kinds of different characteristics, but are you really going to go through life depressed because you didn't grow up to be as tall as the next guy? Or have as big a dick? Or as cute a nose? Whatever?

Restore for you and focus on your new foreskin. It's going to be different, feel different than any other guy's on here. Accept it for what it turns out to be and enjoy the new sensations you gain.

The grass is always greener, they say...

Yunus
October 9th, 2009, 01:41
Restore for you and focus on your new foreskin. It's going to be different, feel different than any other guy's on here. Accept it for what it turns out to be and enjoy the new sensations you gain.

The grass is always greener, they say...

Yes,I agree with you,Joseph.
The foreskin give us the best sensations on our dick.I can imagine what the worst sensations I will feel if I get cut the foreskin which has so many many nerves.