Does a restoring forum require intact men's voices?

[Dasher]

Do you think we need to hear from uncircumcised guys on this forum? Do you think we need to hear direct from them, unfiltered, as the ultimate source of practical knowledge about the foreskin?

I would say yes, based on this insightful -- if rare -- recent comment by an intact guy who just couldn't remain silent when a poster implied that intact guys downplay the importance of their foreskin and say it's "just a piece of skin". Here's what the intact guy had to say:

"Most circumcised males probably don't know how strongly most intact men feel about circumcision because intact men, out of consideration for the feelings of circumcised males, tend to reveal their real feelings about circumcision only to each other. Believe me, they know what they have."

How often do we hear intact guys tell it like it is, like that guy did?

[z726]

But do we really need people to be telling us about what we don't have?

I'd much rather hear from those who have fully restored.

[cutitout27]

I am sure a lot of intact men know what they have, and a lot don't. In my near four decades on the planet I have met a lot of women who have a love affair with their clitoris. And on the same planet I have met women who have said they don't know if they've ever had an orgasm, or never bothered even trying out the equipment. I once talked to a guy cut at 20 who enjoyed sex as much cut as uncut. Said there was no difference, and the idea of cut guys complaining about being cut as infants were just looking for something to explain why they have bad sex. I also met another guy who was cut in his 20's. He said not only was sex not the same, but it was devastating how much he lost. He said there were days he felt suicidal because of all the feelings he could never have back. Why the discrepancies is a mystery to me. All I have are theories.

[greg_b]

I think an intact man can provide insight that restorers may not have. Do I need that to restore? No, but it helps me and I would not want to lose them as members of this site.

Regards

[FalseReality]

I've also been confused as to the major split between the differences after circumcision. I've heard guys say they lost 80% of feeling down there, I've heard guys say they have gained sensitivity. As a guy circumcision was forced on when he was to young to remember I can never get an idea of how it has effected me. This has always made me go sort of crazy wondering how much I have lost.

And how can an intact guy really know what they have, kind of difficult when you have never lived without it. I have seen guys who are less than enthusiastic about their foreskins. They just experience a great orgasm, and say wow that must be due to my foreskin.

Fully restored is definitely a better source of information, however intact guys are welcome as well.

[admin]

I've heard guys say they lost 80% of feeling down there, I've heard guys say they have gained sensitivity.

There are women who swear there is no such thing as a G-spot. Of course others disagree. Let us entertain the possibility that were are each made uniquely, or at least that we are uniquely tuned in to different aspects of sexual response.

[Science Monk]

Here's what the intact guy had to say:
"Most circumcised males probably don't know how strongly most intact men feel about circumcision because intact men, out of consideration for the feelings of circumcised males, tend to reveal their real feelings about circumcision only to each other. Believe me, they know what they have."

How often do we hear intact guys tell it like it is, like that guy did?

I also HAVE seen intact men whisper to each other something like: I don't know why they think circumcised is better. The feeling is in the tip, and THAT"S what they cut off!

Such intact men are hip to what they have. Others, however, are totally oblivious. Still others feel so ostracised by this society they are stymied in even mentioning the subject, even among themselves, and thus never acquire any new information about the advantage they have.

Please also realize, there are grown men who don't even know if they are circumcised or not. Whenever you see a poll where men are asked to check a box identifying themselves as "circumcised" or "not circumcised," there is almost always a small percentage that check the box for "don't know."

David
World As Monkey Island

[Dr. Ron]

I heard this expression many years ago: Comparisons are odious.

Whenever we start comparing, there are always winners and losers. Those who have more and those who have less. Some are made to feel good about themselves, and some who will feel bad.

The point is, information is helpful; but when new information leads to making comparisons, it can also be a detriment.

How does this relate to intactness and circumcision? It is helpful for those of us who are restoring, or have restored, our foreskins to know what it is like to be intact so that we can establish goals for ourselves. It is not helpful if we see ourselves as forever lacking, and not measuring up some how, and therefore, not feeling good about ourselves.

The big issues for me is, however, that those who are cut at birth have forever been deprived of the possibility of knowing what it is like to be intact. That is the real harm that both doctors and parents are inflicting on their patients and/or sons. Taking away potential. Removing the possibilities. Those are the most grievous "sins" that those entrusted with the care of a child can commit. Childhood is all about potential. What will this child grow up to be? For a parent to say that the child will not remember the pain, or know what he is missing, is to deny that child part of his birth right.

Circumcision removes one of the myriad of possibilities that are open to a child's future life. No matter what the supposed benefits, to circumcise without medical necessity goes contrary to the very nature of parenthood.

[Ozymandias]

Of course you don't, why don't you collect all the intact guys together and have them gassed.

[Americut]

I like that there are intact men who actively oppose MGM. I have a friend that's intact, yet he does not have an interest in intactivism. He once said "because I'm not circumcised, I don't feel the way you do about fighting against it". I very swiftly said "lot's of guys that aren't circumcised are actively against what's happening to the boys here because they know it's WRONG and must end". He didn't argue with that, but I know he's just not interested in fighting the cutters. He'll probably have a son in the future and that son will be left intact for sure, he says.

Yes, I'm glad we have intact, anti-circ men.

[admin]

Do we need intact guys?
I would just like to add that "we" includes intact men and it includes women. This forum is for anyone with an interest in foreskin restoration or intactivism.

-Ron

[Mister.Barbecue]

Please also realize, there are grown men who don't even know if they are circumcised or not. Whenever you see a poll where men are asked to check a box identifying themselves as "circumcised" or "not circumcised," there is almost always a small percentage that check the box for "don't know."


I'm sorry that I don't have the link, but I read once that American self-identification of circumcision status actually has a huge percentage of error. Something like ~25% of intact think they are circumcised and ~20% of circumcised think they are intact.

If anyone has the link to this study, please provide.


Such intact men are hip to what they have. Others, however, are totally oblivious. Still others feel so ostracised by this society they are stymied in even mentioning the subject, even among themselves, and thus never acquire any new information about the advantage they have.


I think we should also keep in mind that intact men are affected by circumcision. They are sometimes bullied or humiliated for being "the only uncut guy".
The following is just personal speculation, but: If they also derive great joy from touching their foreskin, I think that might fuck them up a bit, perhaps give them feelings of guilt associated with pleasure. Also it might make them wonder why the hell everyone thinks it's great to not have those feelings. Might make them think they are surrounded by psychos.

[freedom0speech]

A sad fact of humanity is that we often don't understand our own bodies.

I often hear men claim that the head of their penis is where the pleasure is. I can usually correct someone when they say this, because the error is easily verifiable. For the circumcised man, the frenulum/frenular-delta is the most pleasurable area [1]. Many men know this, but they don't have the biological vocabulary to express it. Often a man grips the entire circumference of the glans and strokes it, sometimes giving him the false impression that the pleasurable area is at the glans corona, when in-fact as they stimulate the lower glans area they are stimulating the frenulum/frenular-delta. Many men take this misconception a step further and assume the pleasure zone is the entire glans. In reality the glans is the least pleasurable area of the penis [1]. All this confusion because these areas are so close together and men don't have the vocabulary to express specific pleasure zones.

Sometimes intact men think the glans is the pleasure zone as they massage their foreskin against the it during masturbation, it's hard to know which area you are getting pleasure from when you are touching them both at the same time. Luckily we have a double-blind study to verify what the actual facts are in this regard [1].

Combine the lack of anatomical vocabulary with anatomical ignorance and you have a perfect candidate for false results do to the placebo effect. If these men are told a circumcision will give them more pleasure, they are likely to believe it, and even convince themselves (through the placebo effect and confirmation bias). Couple this with published "studies" which actually consist of phone surveys to men who were circumcised as adults (they wanted to be circumcised, they paid to be circumcised, many/most had phimosis or other issues), asking them if they were pleased with the results, and you have what circumcised men often consider undeniable evidence that circumcision doesn't reduce pleasure, but even enhances it [2] [3] [4]. However, surveys are not well designed studies, they are based on testimony, they are not double-blind and directly measured studies like Sorrels et al [1].

We can easily prove surveys are useless by looking at similar "studies" (ahem, surveys) on circumcised women. If circumcised women also say they are happy being circumcised and even have plenty of orgasms, there is something very wrong with using surveys to prove a lack of human rights violation. Yet that's exactly what we find [5] [6]. Only double-blind direct measurement based studies can give us reliable results [1].


1. ML Sorrells, JL Snyder, MD Reiss, and C Eden.
"Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis."
British Journal of Urology International 99.4 (2007): 864-9. Web.
http://www.nocirc.org/touch-test/bju_6685.pdf

2. Richters, J; Patel HR, Himpson RC, Palmer JH, Mufti GR, Sheriff MK (2006).
"Circumcision in Australia: prevalence and effects on sexual health".
International Journal of Sexually Transmissible Diseases and AIDS 17 (8): 547–554.
doi:10.1258/095646206778145730. PMID 16925903
http://www.cirp.org/library/general/richters1/

3. Fink, K.S.; C.C. Carson and R.F. DeVillis (May 2002).
"Adult circumcision outcomes study: effect on erectile function, penile sensitivity, sexual activity and satisfaction".
Journal of Urology 167 (5): 2113–6. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65098-7. PMID 11956453
http://www.circs.org/library/fink/

4. Masood, S; Patel HR, Himpson RC, Palmer JH, Mufti GR, Sheriff MK (2005).
"Penile sensitivity and sexual satisfaction after circumcision: are we informing men correctly?".
Urol Internationalalis 75 (1): 62–6. doi:10.1159/000085930. PMID 16037710.
http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/masood1/

5. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (vol 109, p 1089)
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2837-female-circumcision-does-not-reduce-sexual-activity.html

6. Pleasure and Orgasm in Women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C).
1: J Sex Med. 2007 Nov;4(6):1666-78. PMID: 17970975
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17970975

[Joseph]

Excellent analysis, freedom. I think you should flesh this out into a paper.

That being said, as an intact man, I'd be lying if I didn't feel a bit of resentment when I hear some guys say "what are YOU doing here?"

Without saying any names, some people have actually compared me to the jogger that jogs around a guy in a wheel chair... purposefully taunting him for what he cannot do...

What a sad way to look at yourself, as a helpless guy in a wheel chair... I guess such guys can and should make only wheel-chaired friends, so that he won't be reminded of his plight...

I think intact guys are important to the debate because they can give THEIR side of the story. Restored guys can give THEIR side, but, unless they were circumcised as adults and can tell a difference, how do THEY know what they have?

Some have said "do we really need intact guys telling us about what we don't have?"

Similarly, can a restored guy tell ME about what I've had all my life?

A restored guy can only give a restored perspective. I think all perspectives should be welcome in debate, circumcised, intact, restored, intact-circumcised, intact-circumcised-restored etc.

[Dasher]

I think intact guys are important to the debate because they can give THEIR side of the story..

Of course. And I'm glad you're on this forum, Joseph. And not just because I happen to agree with you like 100% of the time.

The question was meant to be rhetorical, and came up when an intact guy who is not even registered cut through all the BS and admitted that intact guys can sometimes be tactful and deferential towards cut guys. He said you have to take into consideration that intact guys are often careful not to offend circumcised guys with their true feelings about circumcision. Which they only express to other uncut guys. He did not say what those true feelings are, but obviously they are very negative when it comes to circumcision.

He also said, don 't worry, uncircumcised guys know what they have when it comes to their foreskin.

The guy seemed very sincere. I assume you would probably agree with what he said.

I know that you are intact and contribute a great deal to this forum, and that your posts are always thoughtful and show knowledge and understanding. As a matter of fact, as soon as we see you have posted, most of us head right for it and read it, because we know you will have something important to say.

The whole issue also came up when an uncircumcised friend of mine gave me his opinion of this forum. He said he didn't feel comfortable on it because it was just a bunch of circumcised guys who are unhappy that they were circumcised. He had been humoring me about restoring my foreskin, and basically thought I had lost my mind. However, when he saw that I now have a half-covering foreskin (just like him), his attitude totally changed. He suddenly is looking at things differently now. He even confided to me that he is jealous of other intact guys who have long foreskins, and he has always wanted to have a longer foreskin than he does. So he figures he can maybe use the same methods I have been using to get a longer foreskin that will totally cover his penis. His goal is the same as mine: he wants total coverage. I am trying to persuade him to get a Tugger.

I know that circumcised guys --besides me-- are jealous of uncircumcised guys. I read their posts all the time. Some of these cut guys --just like me-- are obsessed with foreskin. My first encounter with a cut guy who also was jealous of intact guys was a co-worker who told me he wanted to track down the doctor who circumcised him, and kill him. Funny thing is, he was a handsome dude who had a girlfriend who was not only cute but stunningly beautiful. Still, it wasn't enough.

But I never knew before that an uncircumcised guy could be jealous of other uncircumcised guys. That was a new concept for me.

[Joseph]

...intact guys are often careful not to offend circumcised guys with their true feelings about circumcision. Which they only express to other uncut guys...

...The whole issue also came up when an uncircumcised friend of mine gave me his opinion of this forum. He said he didn't feel comfortable on it because it was just a bunch of circumcised guys who are unhappy that they were circumcised.

I must say that initially I didn't think I had a place here. It was Ron that sort of encouraged me to come, because "everyone is welcome."

I certainly don't feel like it's my place to give any guy tips and advice on restoring, and I usually don't. Actually, I just don't. I stick to intactivism, and talking about issues that I think I could chime in on if the time is right.

There were fears that I would eventually meet guys who didn't want me around because I reminded them of what they had lost... in part those fears were confirmed, but I thought, WTF. I'll stick around anyway. You can't please everybody every day...

Glad to provide a different point of view...

Initially I thought restoration was a bunch of hooey... Could men really restore their foreskins? And if they could stretch out that skin, could it really compare? What ever you get can never be compared to the real thing... I commend these guys for trying, but we should be working on stopping this from happening to others... or so I thought...

As I talked to more and more guys, I actually started having faith in restoring. Guys testified to a markedly increased degree of sensation. Stretching out a new foreskin dekeratinizes the glans, giving it more sensitivity and more shine. I was actually amazed to see some of the results! Restoration CAN make a difference. My mind was changed.

Don't get me wrong; I try to promote restoration whenever I can, but I still think that for every guy restoring, there's a whole slew of babies getting circumcised. Restoration can be a great thing, but we need to focus on stopping the mutilation of children. For all intents and purposes, men shouldn't HAVE to restore. We shouldn't HAVE to have Ron breaking his head coming up with new products. There shoudn't be a website like this, and there shouldn't be forums like these.

I'll talk to guys about restoration, just to through the idea out there, I share the link to TLCTugger and tell them to come to these forums. But I think it's important to accept that while some guys decide to restore, others won't. Some guys see circumcision for the violation of human rights that it is, but are actually comfortable with their circumcisions. There comfortable with the degree of sexual satisfaction and don't feel the need to restore. But if their mind is changed, and they see circumcision for what it is, then that's OK. Maybe in the future they'll be desensitized and remember my words, and try restoring, maybe they won't. But the point is, the word of restoration got out.

That's my view... and I think there was more, but can't remember it the moment... that's it for now! Until the next time...

[admin]

re: Subject line "Do we need intact guys?"I must say that initially I didn't think I had a place here.

I'm changing the thead title to reduce the chance that anyone might get that feeling.

I say asking "Do we need intact guys?" is like asking do we need red-heads or guys over 6 feet. Whether they fulfill some specific utilitarian purpose or not, they are part of our world and a welcome voice in whatever we discuss.

-Ron

[AnonS5]

Yes indeed, it's good to have a voice of someone who knows what it's like to be gloriously whole.