My struggles with grief over circumcusion

[Going Hooded]

I have accepted that if someone has been circumcised without consent (ie a child) the option exists for foreskin restoration. It is a commitment ... and with the commitment is passion for wholeness and they will value what they have. I don't agree with routine male circumcision, but it can be undone and almost identical to the original skin. This is kind of how I resolved my grief over my circumcision. I am not trying to minimize anyone else's struggle nor do I intend for these words to hurt someone.

I sometimes still have sad moments, but I am mostly past the grief that came with this.

[Baron]

"Almost identical"? I have to disagree with that statement, and certainly I disagree with the statement that it "can be undone". Restoration doesn't undo circumcision. Restoring doesn't regrow the severed specialized cells or structures that were in the foreskin that has been cut off. They're gone. Restoring is worth it, but it is a stop-gap measure and is still a shadow of the former functionality of the intact penis.

I don't mean to attack you or anything, but those statements echo the arguments that the pro-circ crowd use. It is good that you are finding a way to deal with the situation, but some people now think the ability to restore gives them the right to mutilate babies.

[Someone mundane]

"Almost identical"? I have to disagree with that statement, and certainly I disagree with the statement that it "can be undone". Restoration doesn't undo circumcision. Restoring doesn't regrow the severed specialized cells or structures that were in the foreskin that has been cut off. They're gone. Restoring is worth it, but it is a stop-gap measure and is still a shadow of the former functionality of the intact penis.

I don't mean to attack you or anything, but those statements echo the arguments that the pro-circ crowd use. It is good that you are finding a way to deal with the situation, but some people now think the ability to restore gives them the right to mutilate babies.

Here's what it comes down to.

Do you care more about restoring YOURSELF, repairing the damage dealt to the only life that you have and will ever live on this earth, or about martyring yourself for the cause of political activism?

I just hope you realize that in a section focused on dealing with personal grief, stressing that the damage is irreparable and that the restored foreskin will never be as good is most likely not going to calm anyones feelings over the fact. Reading things like the lost list never helped me come anywhere near close to alleviating my grief, I can say that for certain. It only made me feel near suicidal. I already felt bad enough and absolutely shocked and disgusted with learning that my favored organ was sliced into at birth for no good reason at all, but then I learn of all the inadequacies it has by comparison to a natural one, only to have the facts shoved down my throat even harder by how sub-par and second-rate the intactivist message makes restoration seem, along with how centered it all is on ensuring children are spared. Damn the ones already afflicted, hmm? Don't get me wrong, though. I am (painfully in the above case) receptive to facts and can easily recognize what is and isn't ethical when I see it.

Further still, I don't often (more like never) see pro-cut people making that excuse. It seems to be solely the intactivists that are more worried about that. Usually pro-cut people are weirded out by the idea that anybody would want to restore.

I've also asked a man who was intact most of his life but then cut later whether he thought his foreskin made a considerable difference. He is one of my friends online. He DID miss it of course, but strangely never thought that it was particularly sensitive by itself. What are you supposed to make of examples like these if the damage is so terrible?

I'm not the only one to have felt this way about all this, Cobra did too and I practically echo some of his sentiments. I see no reason for messages like that on this section. It is supposed to be for helping people to deal with their grief, not breaking them further. Besides, if somebody were coming to this forum in the first place, I think it's pretty safe to assume that the majority would be familiar with the idea that you should leave well enough alone. All I am saying really is not to shoot aggrieved men struggling with this in their foot. There are times when the message can border on excessive and harmful.

[Americut]

a shadow of the former functionality of the intact penis.

As far as I understand, when we talk about functionality we're referring to mobility for gliding action during intercourse, as well as spontaneous rollover for protective covering over the supposed to be moist and supple mucous membrane, while flaccid. I can't think of more important foreskin functionality than those, and restoration accommodates both.

some people now think the ability to restore gives them the right to mutilate babies.
I just wrote a huge reply to this (which I was hoping to condense), but this sums it up well enough:


Further still, I don't often (more like never) see pro-cut people making that excuse. It seems to be solely the intactivists that are more worried about that. Usually pro-cut people are weirded out by the idea that anybody would want to restore.

[finman]

Restoration is about doing what we can to improve our situation. The end result is not perfect, not as good as the original (or even better, as has been suggested) but it is infinitely better than circumcised.

Surely it is better to face facts, and appreciate the enormous improvement we can make though perseverance and a little application.

[cobra]

You could TECHNICALLY grow more foreskin than you would have had if you were never circumcised. Does this make for a "better than natural" foreskin? You would have more nerve endings and skin surface area than you were genetically determined to have... just a severed frenulum and a scar... and an intact man could have the same damage. Maybe some kind of zipper accident in a port-a-potty caught in a tornado.

Point being, self-pity is useless. Grow more skin than you would have had. I've been doing this seven years and am close to what I think I would have had intact-- no proof, just a sense in my brain that it is "almost done". Regardless, there is a part of me that wants to grow just an excessive amount of skin. Just so I win.

[Baron]

oh im sorry let me throw some platitudes around

you know restoring is great it is only going to get better

except i still cant feel sexual pleasure

and i still want to kill myself

but yeah jump down my throat because i care about children who are being mutilated right now this second

maybe if we all just close our eyes all our worries and strife will go away

nope my dick is still broken

why am i even responding i dont eve

[Someone mundane]

oh im sorry let me throw some platitudes around

you know restoring is great it is only going to get better

except i still cant feel sexual pleasure

and i still want to kill myself

but yeah jump down my throat because i care about children who are being mutilated right now this second

maybe if we all just close our eyes all our worries and strife will go away

nope my dick is still broken

why am i even responding i dont eve

Seriously? The only point I was trying to convey is that there's a time and place. That's all. There was no offense intended and I don't see how all that sarcasm (apologies if it isn't) was warranted.

Restoration is about doing what we can to improve our situation. The end result is not perfect, not as good as the original (or even better, as has been suggested) but it is infinitely better than circumcised.

You're right, Finman. It is about doing what can be done to improve somebody's situation. Because of this, I think it's for the best to leave it at that for sections of the forum aimed at helping men through their grief.

The latter comment just seems to be going in circles to me...

"Oh it's awful, nowhere near as good as natural, but wait wait wait, it's still good."

Forgive me if I am obnoxious about this, it's just that I find the support aspects of the intactivism cause to be somewhat lacking at times... This discovery can be devastating to some people. But aren't I stating the obvious? I think it's also obvious that the original is gone forever. No argument there.