The basic premise of some of those who oppose FR is that the foreskin is "just a useless little flap of skin". I have heard the opposition repeat that phrase more than once in the last couple days. Their basic argument is this: "How can FR do all that when it is just a useless little flap of skin." Of course, with that mindset, they are not going to understand where we restorers are coming from. Their reaction is understandably heated because what we have discovered and espouse would completely destroy that mindset and make them face the awful truth. Bear in mind, we are talking about men who think it is a horrible crime to remove the clitoral hood of a female, but quite fine to cut off a hunk of dick. Is it a case of the oppressed identifying with the oppressors, or denial, or a mixture of the two?

In a country where sexual related crimes are the most shocking and the most severely punished, I am appalled at the apathy and anger that comes into play when one talks about circumcision. Many men just don't care. Others react with knee-jerk rage-- "There's nothing wrong with me! I'm fine! Shut your fucking mouth about it! I don't want to hear anymore!"

It makes me sad.

If you want to know what happened to you when your were born, here it is...They took you into a room and strapped your flailing little newborn arms and legs down. Then a stranger shoved a probe underneath your foreskin, which at the time, still adheres and protects the glans, and forcefully tore the two parts away from one another. By then, you are shreiking in pain because no anaesthetic was used on you. After that, the skin was retracted, clamped, and efficiently sliced away and thrown in the garbage-- or even more horribly, stored for sale later for medical experiments or use as breathable surgical bandages...baby skin is very valuable. For the next few weeks, you urinated and deficated onto the open wound, unable to sleep deeply, constantly in pain, robbed by pain of the bonding experience with your mother and father, because there was agony every time you were held close to them. This experience must reverberate through the halls of the subconscious for the rest of your life.

Open your eyes and look at this picture.

The most sensitive and important part of your penis, STOLEN FROM YOU!!!! Your foreskin is packed with dense, sexual-specific nerves, glands to keep your glans supple and sensitive and healthy, as well as the sensitive frenar delta and the ridged band (which stimulates the female during intercourse as well as gliding inside her to make sex more comfortable). You also lost estrogen receptors and doctors don't even know WHY we have those-- but that doesn't keep them from cutting them off.

Like I said above, though, if you just think it is a useless little flap of skin, you will never see the truth or understand where we restorers are coming from.

You can be content with what you have.

Just don't get in the way!
 
AncientChina said:
To wrap my actual head around or to wrap my penis head around? ?:(

:D

I can tie my flaccid dick in a knot:D
 
Kong, just a few points... we do have "infantile amnesia" - therefore pain at childbirth and during circumcision isn't applicable. In fact, we hadn't had enough life experience to distinguish pain from pleasure, and at this point we hadn't developed enough cognitive ability to associate pain with any sort of remorse. Also, the nervous system hadn't developed enough to recognize "pain" as anything out of the ordinary. The screaming and crying is an inborn tendency, reaction, and adaptation.

Also, any sort of negative subconcious association you have from childbirth is simply a false memory, surely you've heard the research on this.

So, I'm not arguing for or against FR. But your explanation of the trauma certainly doesn't hold up with developmental theory. I am a psychology major, specializing in development.
 
Really...? So how long can we subject our children to pain before it makes an impact on the psyche? :D Just the first few weeks? Months? Hey, my dad beat me until I was 16 years old. I bet he read the same material you did! :D

You may be a psychology major, but I bet if you stuck a baby with red hot needles or cut it with razor blades, it's going to hurt that baby and make it cry. It probably won't want to be held by you either.
 
Last edited:
Do you want to know honestly or are you just being funny? I'd be happy to go into the psychology of attachment, emotion, learning theory, and cognitive development to answer your question. And all without bias, over extension, or over exaggeration.

Maybe you should take away your disclaimer. People might listen.
 
Typical psychobabble.

Kid, there's the intellectual world and there's the real world. They are only vaguely associated.

Pain hurts.

Abortion is murder.

Humans attain sentience BEFORE being educated at college.

Not flaming you...just poking a little fun. Don't believe everything you read in those books, bud. Just cause they're thick and heavy doesn't mean they're right.
 
My girlfriend does tell me I am the most politically correct person she knows. I can't combat the "step into the real world" argument. Personality flaw maybe.
 
Much respect for that admission. My estimate of your intelligence just jumped five notches...and it was already pretty high to begin with!
 
AncientChina said:
Lucky fuck!

Last time I tried that...........I had to have my mom come in and help me get it out of the knot. :eek:
You can't be serious?!
 
AlloyCG said:
Do you want to know honestly or are you just being funny? I'd be happy to go into the psychology of attachment, emotion, learning theory, and cognitive development to answer your question. And all without bias, over extension, or over exaggeration.

Maybe you should take away your disclaimer. People might listen.


How much of this has to do with the physical and medical world? I mean adaptation and reaction aren't just stale and empty words. There are reasons behind those their usage. Why is it believed to be so in general? I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm curious. Just if you have time maybe PM me or post some theories or whatnot. But babies do actually feel pain. I just know that physically it has been proven that there are very strong inignorable indications (increased heart rate, decreased oxygen in the blood, increased blood pressure, and a jump in stress hormones have all been documented and are used to tell whether or not a newborn or infant is in pain) that say they do feel pain. I don't how it applies to their subconscious later in life, but I wouldn't think circumcision is a great way to start life. Isn't it about development and moving on from one stage to the next? How does cutting off flesh from a very sensitive and vital body part that shouldn't be removed contribute positively to the development of a person? I always thought there were main stages that we go through in life and the first one had to do with trust. I guess that wasn't correct then. I'm not saying with circumcision all trust is lost from a baby and its parents, but still like I mentioned I can't see how it is good. And wouldn't there then be some kind of consequence?
 
Babies don't feel pain? erm HELLO!?
Watch a video of a baby being circumsized, if it doesnt make you wanna cry your are stone.
 
AlloyCG said:
Kong, just a few points... we do have "infantile amnesia" - therefore pain at childbirth and during circumcision isn't applicable. In fact, we hadn't had enough life experience to distinguish pain from pleasure, and at this point we hadn't developed enough cognitive ability to associate pain with any sort of remorse. Also, the nervous system hadn't developed enough to recognize "pain" as anything out of the ordinary. The screaming and crying is an inborn tendency, reaction, and adaptation.

Also, any sort of negative subconcious association you have from childbirth is simply a false memory, surely you've heard the research on this.

So, I'm not arguing for or against FR. But your explanation of the trauma certainly doesn't hold up with developmental theory. I am a psychology major, specializing in development.
This type of thinking is exactly why its so hard to abolish circumcisions of babies! reading tripe like this just makes my blood boil. do you actually believe that babies don't feel pain? as a father of 4 i know they do in fact feel pain and can distingush between pain and pleasure. if you poke them do they not cry/ if you cuddle and caress them do they not quiet down and become content, in fact the only reason they don't is because they are in some kind of pain. research has proven that babies feel excruciating pain while being circed and the ones that dont scream have already gone into shock. Doctors and such need to step into this centry and leave the medival thinking behind.!!!
 
There are too many people who swear by FR to discount it. I do think some of the arguments for FR are specious. In my case, my circ scar is so tight that my balls are sucked up tight against my abodomen, and my dick curves sharply upward. So far, FR has released some of that tension. Who can argue against that? If you don't believe, go to another forum. The FR forum is for believers, not naysayers.
 
Foreskin restoration and erect bends have taken most of the curve out of my dick. It is still slightly curved...but to a degree that I and my wife both like. Also, I used to have a glans that was positioned at the end of the shaft kind of strangely, and now it is more normal. I won't say FR did it alone, cause I spent alot of time bending it and trying to push the head into a more normal position...but I will say it helped alot. I don't get near as many skin tears doing my erect bends anymore. I used to get alot of little tears in the inner mucosal tissue when trying to unbend my cock cause the skin was so tight.
 
iwant8inches said:
How much of this has to do with the physical and medical world? I mean adaptation and reaction aren't just stale and empty words. There are reasons behind those their usage. Why is it believed to be so in general? I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm curious. Just if you have time maybe PM me or post some theories or whatnot. But babies do actually feel pain. I just know that physically it has been proven that there are very strong inignorable indications (increased heart rate, decreased oxygen in the blood, increased blood pressure, and a jump in stress hormones have all been documented and are used to tell whether or not a newborn or infant is in pain) that say they do feel pain. I don't how it applies to their subconscious later in life, but I wouldn't think circumcision is a great way to start life. Isn't it about development and moving on from one stage to the next? How does cutting off flesh from a very sensitive and vital body part that shouldn't be removed contribute positively to the development of a person? I always thought there were main stages that we go through in life and the first one had to do with trust. I guess that wasn't correct then. I'm not saying with circumcision all trust is lost from a baby and its parents, but still like I mentioned I can't see how it is good. And wouldn't there then be some kind of consequence?

Don't confuse physiological response with psychological response. Pain is simply another form of stimulation; cognitive ability hasn't reached a level of attaching negative connotations with the physiological response. It's very difficult to imagine, I understand. When it comes to attachment and nurture(what you are calling trust,) a single instance of physiological "trauma" isn't enough to do psychological damage that early in life. Hold down a 3-year-old and mutilate his penis, it's another story.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not for circumcision by any means, but it's based more on the principle of choice.
 
Alloy has it right here; you can't retain any type of experience you have when you're that young, even subconciously. It might be "BS academics," but it's also a simple matter of brain chemistry and emperical study. Birth is fairly traumatic . . . do we all hate our mothers for it? Nothing that happens when we are that young is stored in the brain in any fashion. I have a harder time taking any of this FR stuff seriolusly when people are running around claiming that science is just BS. In the real world, everything that you use and enjoy all day and the information that produced it comes from research and academics. Enjoying that computer you're using right now? Well I can promise you that it wasn't created by people listening to their intuition or gut . . . because things just seemed obvious to them, duh. So if science and scholarly research are bunk, what is reliable information? Uncited claims from websites? Personal hearsay? Give me a break . . .
 
Back
Top