Male circumcision

Found some interesting information on another forum about male circumcision and thought i'd post it here. Sort of glad I wasn't born in the US
----------------------------------------------------------------

Circumcision removes the most important sensory component of the foreskin - thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors called Meissner's corpuscles. Also lost are branches of the dorsal nerve, and between 10,000 and 20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types. Together these detect subtle changes in motion and temperature, as well as fine gradations in texture.

There is no known method of restoring Meissner's corpuscles or other specialized sensory nerve cells. However, restoring and restored men almost universally experience tremendous increases in sensitivity, in part because the highly sensitive nerve cells in the glans are no longer buried under several layers of keratinized skin.

The frenulum is a highly erogenous V-shaped structure on the underside of the glans that tethers the foreskin. During circumcision it is frequently either amputated with the foreskin or severed, which destroys or diminishes its sexual and physiological functions.

------------ this is comparable to a male G spot that's right guys... you can find one without digging in your ***, if you're uncut that is.


The soft mucosa (inner foreskin) contains its own immunological defense system which produces plasma cells. These cells secrete immunoglobulin antibodies as well as antibacterial and antiviral proteins, including the pathogen killing enzyme lysozyme

The presence of estrogen receptors within the foreskin has only recently been discovered. Their purpose is not yet understood and needs further study.

There is no known method of restoring the foreskin's estrogen receptors.

Several feet of blood vessels, including the frenular artery and branches of the dorsal artery, are removed in circumcision. The loss of this rich vascularization interrupts normal blood flow to the shaft and glans of the penis, damaging the natural function of the penis and altering its development.

The terminal branch of the pudendal nerve connects to the skin of the penis, the prepuce, the corpora cavernosa, and the glans. Destruction of these nerves is a rare but devastating complication of circumcision. If cut during circumcision, the top two-thirds of the penis will be almost completely without sensation.
There is no known method of restoring dorsal nerves.



• Every year some boys lose their entire penises from circumcision accidents and infections. They are then "sexually reassigned" by castration and transgender surgery, and are expected to live their lives as females.

[Sources: 1. J. P. Gearhart and J. A. Rock, "Total Ablation of the Penis after Circumcision with Electrocautery: A Method of Management and Long-Term Followup," Journal of Urology 142 (1989):799-801. 2. M. Diamond and H. K. Sigmundson, "Sex Reassignment at Birth: Long-Term Review and Clinical Implications," Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 151 (1997): 298-304.]


• Every year many boys in the United States and elsewhere lose their lives as a result of circumcision - a fact that is routinely ignored or obscured.

[Sources: 1. G. W. Kaplan, "Complications of Circumcision," Urologic Clinics of North America 10 (1983): 543-549. 2. R. S. Thompson, "Routine Circumcision in the Newborn: An Opposing View," Journal of Family Practice 31 (1990): 189-196.


http://www.norm.org/lost.html


Postoperative Complications

Skin Bridge. Another adverse result of circumcision is the formation of a skin bridge between the penile shaft and the glans.34 Smegma often accumulates under those skin bridges. Additionally these bridges may either tether the erect penis, with resultant pain or penile curvature. The treatment of such bridges is simple surgical division. How such problems arise is not completely clear. Some investigators have suggested that injury to the glans at time of circumcision, with resultant fusion to the circumcision wound is the genesis of this problem. In my opinion there must be, in addition, incomplete separation of the inner preputial epithelium at the time of circumcision so that there is firm fusion of skin, inner preputial epithelium, and glans at one point. Later, there is spontaneous separation of the inner preputial epithelium from the glans as normally occurs in the uncircumcised penis, but because one point is fixed to the glans, a skin bridge results. If this thesis is correct, this complication could be avoided by completely freeing the inner preputial epithelium from the glans at the time of circumcision.

Infection. Infections occur after circumcision, as in any surgical procedure. The incidence of infection in one series of neonatal circumcisions was 0.4 per cent,23 while in a series of older boys it was as high as 10 per cent.21 Presumably, most of these infections are minor and of no consequence. However, major morbidity has been reported, including major skin loss,68 necrotizing fascitis,72 staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome,1 Fournier's gangrene,65 generalized sepsis,33 and meningitis.56 Some of these complications have resulted in severe permanent disability or death.12,60

Urinary retention. Urinary retention has been reported following circumcision, usually secondary to a tight circular bandage, and obviously is best treated by removal of the bandage.7,20,23,28,62 In addition, urinary retention secondary to a tight bandage presumably sets the stage for urosepsis in some of the reported cases of systemic infection following circumcision.28,47. When tincture of benzoin is used in or as a dressing for circumcision, it may occlude the urethral meatus and produce urinary retention.31 Hesitancy and dysuria are seen following circumcision in as many as 60 percent of older boys.21

Meatitis. Meatitis or meatal ulcer is a consequence of circumcision that may be considered a complication. The reported incidence of meatitis with or without ulcer varies between 8 and 31 per cent13,37,44,55 and usually occurs later in the first year of life, but while the child is still in diapers.

Meatitis and meatal ulcer are rarely, if ever, seen in the uncircumcised boy. Meatal stenosis is far more common in circumcised adult men than in uncircumcised adult men5 and is believed to result from meatitis in infancy.

Chordee. Chordee can be produced by circumcision, especially if the procedure is performed at the time of acute inflammation.31 This chordee usually is produced by a dense scar on the ventrum of the penis, and a Z-plasty often suffices for its resolution.

Cysts. Inclusion cysts in the circumcision line have been reported.31,62 These presumably are produced by the rolling in of epidermis at the time of circumcision or perhaps by the implantation of smegma in the circumcision wound. Some of these cysts may grow to rather large proportions. Even small cysts can become infected and prove a source of morbidity. The treatment is obviously surgical excision.

Lymphedema. Penile lymphedema may occur following circumcision especially if the wound separates or becomes infected.62 The treatment of this complication must be individualized, but skin grafting may be required for resolution.

Fistulas. Urethrocutaneous fistulas have been reported following circumcision.11,36,38,42,62 Most have occurred with a clamp or a Plastibell type of circumcision, but in many such instances sutures were also utilized in the area of the frenulum for control of hemorrhage. Presumably, these fistulas occur either because the urethra is actually pulled into and crushed by the circumcision clamp or because the urethra is actually incised either with a knife or as suture placed for hemostasis. The prevention of this complication lies in the operators visualizing exactly what is being done in the course of a circumcision. In a few patients an unrecognized congenital megalourethra has been directly incised resulting in fistula.61 Obviously, as was stated earlier, any penile abnormality is reason to delay circumcision; by heeding this caveat one can avoid creating a fistula in the patient with megolourethra.

Necrosis. Necrosis and slough of the glans or even entire penis has been reported following circumcision. Distal ischemia producing such tissue loss may result from infection,15 from the use of solutions containing epinephine, from vigorous attempts at hemostasis with suture or cautery,49 from the prolonged use of a tourniquet, or from a tight bandage.63 Necrosis is particularly likely to result if cautery is applied directly to a circumcision clamp (e.g., the Gomco). When the entire penis is lost following such a misadventure, it usually is best to change the child's sex of rearing to female. Such changes are particularly successful when accomplished before 18 months of age.49 Surgical reconstruction along female lines is far simpler and eminently more satisfactory in such circumstances than is reconstruction of a phallus.

Hypospadias and Epispadias. Both hypospadias and epispadias have inadvertently been produced during circumcision by splitting the glans penis at the time of dorsal or ventral split preparatory to actual excision of the prepuce.46 The operator can prevent this complication by visualizing what is done rather than by performing some aspect of the procedure blindly. On rare occasions the penile or scrotal skin has been inadvertently lacerated.23,47 These lacerations probably result from carelessness but rarely are of any consequence. On occasion, the tip of the glans has been excised, usually when the operator was using a blind technique.

Complications of Plastibell. When the Plastibell is utilized, the ring of the bell may migrate and by pressure necrosis produce a set of problems unique to this technique. If the ring may migrate and by pressure necrosis produce a set of problems unique to this technique. If the ring is too large it may migrate proximally and produce a groove in the shaft itself.14,23,30,45,59,73 To avoid such complications, any retained Plastibell ring should be removed after several days if it has not fallen off spontaneously.

Impotence. Impotence has been reported following circumcision in adults.26,64. In two instances this complication was caused by injection of anesthetic agent into the corpora.53

Psychosocial issues. Circumcision in the adult may precipitate, or be a part of, psychotic delusional behavior.4,19 One may detect such psychiatric problems preoperatively by carefully scrutinizing the motives leading the a.symptomatic adult to seek circumcision.

It recently has been reported that a subset of the homosexual male population is greatly disturbed by the state of being circumcised, to the extent that they have requested and actually have undergone, uncircumcision.48 Just as with undiversion, the trend away from routine neonatal circumcision may result in even fewer uncircumcisions than are currently performed. Uncircumcision is not a new operation but has been present since antiquity, its purpose usually being to obliterate signs of religious identifications.

Anesthetic Complications. Lastly, the anesthetic or lack thereof, may produce complications. General anesthesia led to deaths related to circumcision in at least one study.37 Caudal anesthesia is currently being employed in some centers,32 and its use, like the use of all regional anesthetics has its own inherent complications. When local anesthetic agents are injected into the corpora cavernosa, they can injure the tissues, producing impotence as previously noted.53 Additionally, idiosyncratic reactions and overdosages can occur. Solutions containing epinephrine may produce local tissue problems or systemic toxicity.6 The performance of neonatal circumcision without anesthesia produces decreased Po2,57 increased serum cortisol, and withdrawal,25 all indirect evidence of pain. Additionally, circumcision without anesthesia in a newborn has precipitated a pneumothorax.3



http://www.norm.org/notjust.html




F A C T S

[for anatomical clarification and references, visit Question 8 of our FAQ]

The prepuce (foreskin) is a natural protective covering for the glans (head) of the penis and is the most erogenous tissue of the penis, containing over 240 feet of nerves and over 1,000 nerve endings.

Average adult foreskin consists of 1-1/2 inches of outer skin and 1-1/2 inches of inner mucosal lining and is 5 inches in circumference (erect). Infant circumcision ultimately destroys what would become 15 square inches of erogenous tissue, or approximately 50% of the adult penile shaft skin and its nervous system.

The naturally adherent, non-retractile infant foreskin is torn from the glans before circumcision. We now know infants DO feel pain. They rarely receive anesthesia and/or post-operative pain management.

85% of the world's males are intact with few foreskin problems. America is the only developed nation left in the world still circumcising most (60%) of its newborn males for non-religious reasons.

Every day in the United States, over 3,300 baby boys are circumcised, more than 1.25 million infants annually, at an annual cost to parents and health insurers exceeding $200 million.

American medicine has failed to prove unequivocally and conclusively that circumcision carries any significant medical advantage over the intact state for the majority of males or their partners. It has also never researched the long-term physical, sexual, emotional or psychological consequences to men of infant circumcision.

Long-term harm includes: skin tags, skin bridges, prominent scars, tight/painful erections, bleeding during sex, bowing/curvature, loss of sensitivity, excessive/painful stimulation needed to orgasm, sexual dysfunction, anger, resentment, feelings of parental betrayal, mutilation/human rights violated, not feeling whole or natural, inferiority to intact males, low self-esteem, addictions or dependencies, etc.

run down of female vs male circumcision
http://www.noharmm.org/comparison.htm



These men claim not only that circumcision is traumatic to the newborn but also that the removal of the protective covering of the glans leads to keratinisation, a process which begins immediately after the loss of the foreskin and continues throughout life. Dr. Thomas Ritter, a US surgeon who was an early campaigner against circumcision, says over time the exposed glans takes on the character of external skin rather than mucous membrane, becoming dry and leathery.

It is said this toughening process causes loss of sensitivity of the glans, reducing sensitivity during sex.

In addition, circumcision is said to have other impacts on sexual pleasure.

The foreskin itself is believed to contain a generous endowment of specialised nerve endings which contribute to sexual feeling, and the movement of the foreskin over the glans during intercourse enhances the pleasurable sensations of sex.

Loss of the foreskin is believed to have a much greater impact on adult sexuality than has previously been acknowledged.

Other circumcised men complain of life-long irritation of the exposed glans as it comes in contact with clothing during normal activity.

Some claim discomfort during masturbation when the exposed glans is directly stimulated.

Some men are so angry about this involuntary surgery that they refer to it as an assault, and equate it to genital mutilation of the young female who is ritually circumcised for religious or cultural reasons.

http://www.cirp.org/library/restoration/pertot/

Moved out of the Penis Enlargement forum.

Maybe you guys don't care what was done to you, but I experience much of the rage and feelings of betrayal that was described in the article presented by Dagger. What fucking right did anyone have to cut off peices of my body?!?! If you think there is nothing wrong with it, let some stranger come to your house and cut off your child's earlobes or nostrils and see what you think then. There is absolutely no difference. Mutilation is mutilation. Thank you, Dagger, for posting this informative article.

My dad had some complications with it(I dont know what exactly) so he chose not to have me cut and I'm glad.

Im uncut an glad. I like feelin my skin roll over my head as I thrust in an out of a woman.

I think it's all a bit overstated really.

I had my foreskin removed as an infant because it would not retract over the glans and was causing problems. Now obviously, what I've never had (at least to my memory) I've never missed ... but; My dick feels pretty sensitive to me! ... sometimes it's hard as hell to stop myself cumming during intercourse because the glans really do "feel". Condoms reduce the sensitivity just like I guess they do for you guys who are uncut but to make out circumcision removes 50% of the sensitivity must be CRAP! ... If I had 50% more feel, I'd be walking around with permanently sticky pants from the friction caused by walking!

Whilst I guess it can go wrong, and whilst I'm no advocate of cutting for anything other than medical reasons, I can't see why you have to resort to scare mongery? Is it for selfish reasons? did you have problems? do you want us "cut" guys to feel deprived or inadequate? I bloody well don't! ... well not about that anyway (in size maybe lol)

If I had a choice ... I'd not want a foreskin back .... SO THERE! LOL

Blimey Kong!

I've never had a post so firmly jumped on, or picked to pieces. nIf it wasn't for your rather patronising tone I'd be quite flattered.

Let's just get a couple of things straight ... I'm no advocate of circumcision and I'm not in any kind of denial. If you think I am then you are very much mistaken or one of those smart arses who reckons anyone with opposing views to anything, is simply a closet supporter who won't admit it.

I have no axe to grind and I'm sorry if you had a bad time because of circumcision. However, as this forum is probably read by young lads who are often insecure enough, I thought I'd simply try to add a sense of proportion. The original post would have them believe that they are freaks who can't possibly enjoy sex like those normal guys with foreskins ... that is patently untrue. No, I don't know what it feels like to have a foreskin, I don't know if the feeling is better, but I do know I'm happy with the way my dick feels. For those with foreskins I wouldn't suggest you get cut to see if it feels better to be like me ... so why would I want to "grow" a foreskin to see if it feels better to have one?

Now ... to your disection of my post :s

I didn't say I had my foreskin removed at birth ... I said as an infant. If you must know ... apparently my glans popped out of the end of my foreskin but it was too tight to roll back over. This was causing strangulation of the head of my penis so the forskin had to be removed. Right or wrong? I don't know, but here in England it wasn't routine to remove forskins back in the mid sixties, so I have no reason to think it was done for any other reason than a genuine medical one.

I don't suffer from premature ejaculation, but neither do I suffer lack of sensitivity. I was trying to say that if what was claimed (up to 50% of sensitive tissue and associated feeling removed) was true, then I couldn't understand how an uncut guy managed to hold back! lol Oh, and why bring nationality into all this? circumcision goes on all over the world to a greater or lesser extent ... or are you suggesting American doctors are programmed to remove foreskins during their training?

As for the scare-mongery? well, see what I said at the beginning of this post about young readers and think about our responsibility to be balanced. I'm happy to accept nature knows best and I don't think circucision is a particularly good thing as a routine proceedure. However, the original post is negative to the extreme and is SO scary it almost made me want to throw my hands up in despair and pray to God to restore the huge loss I have suffered over the years! Bollocks!

Ivan

PS. As for size? Perhaps having a foreskin would have made me 1/2" bigger (though I doubt it) but I guess that wouldn't stop me wanting more ... just like everyone one else on here, big or small, cut or uncut.

Sorry for your loss.

kong1971 said:

Maybe you guys don't care what was done to you, but I experience much of the rage and feelings of betrayal that was described in the article presented by Dagger. What fucking right did anyone have to cut off peices of my body?!?! If you think there is nothing wrong with it, let some stranger come to your house and cut off your child's earlobes or nostrils and see what you think then. There is absolutely no difference. Mutilation is mutilation. Thank you, Dagger, for posting this informative article.

Click to expand...

exactly how im feeling... pissed off

I jumped on your post and picked it to pieces only because you restated the misconceptions that keep this barbaric practice going. At some point, men are going to have to wake up and admit that an atrocity is being performed on our gender every minute of the day and say, "No more! There is nothing wrong with our penises. Stop cutting them up!"

I have nothing personal against you, aside from the fact that, in just a couple short paragraphs, you totally blew off dagger's excellent and factual post on the inherit complications of circumcision, and the lifelong losses that are incurred by what is essentially only cosmetic surgery.

You state:

I have no axe to grind and I'm sorry if you had a bad time because of circumcision. However, as this forum is probably read by young lads who are often insecure enough, I thought I'd simply try to add a sense of proportion. The original post would have them believe that they are freaks who can't possibly enjoy sex like those normal guys with foreskins ... that is patently untrue. No, I don't know what it feels like to have a foreskin, I don't know if the feeling is better, but I do know I'm happy with the way my dick feels. For those with foreskins I wouldn't suggest you get cut to see if it feels better to be like me ... so why would I want to "grow" a foreskin to see if it feels better to have one?

Those "young lads" are the ones we absolutely HAVE to reach! They are soon to be young fathers who need to be educated so that they can make the correct and informed choice of leaving their sons untouched. The reality is, you don't know what it is like to have a foreskin, SO WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO INFLUENCE OTHERS?

I have been restoring for six months now. I feel I have the right to state my personal and informed opinion on the difference. Once my glans began to dekeratinize and my sensitivity was restored, as well as the intense pleasure of feeling moist skin rolling back and forth over the head during sex, I can say that sex before was about a 6 out of 10, where sex with restored sensitivity is about a 9. 10 I reserve for the untouched.

Please re-read my post properly will you? If you do you will see that ....

I DO NOT ADVOCATE CIRCUMCISION! Nowhere does it state that I do! Why do you think I am trying to influence others? I am not ... unlike you.

I have a son ... I haven't had him cut, why would I? I agree with you, circumcision is wrong and should really only be done for GENUINE medical reasons (which believe me do exist on occassion). Now if my son had been cut for similar reasons to myself, I certainly would want him being made to feel inadequate because of the views of someone like you. That is how I thought you came across in your reply to my post, rightly or wrongly. Daggers original post WAS informative and very interesting but it certainly wasn't balanced. If circumcision affected even just you so badly (and certainly if a significant number feel the same) then it is very obvious the practice IS VERY WRONG and should not be routinely carried out.

Just so it is quite clear! The reason for my post was to reassure those who HAVE been done that their sex lives are not going to be forever blighted because of it. I'm 39, married, have 5 kids and a good sex life .... and I'm circumcised .... Oh dear, I should be a quivering wreck desperate to know what REAL sex feels like! Get real!

Yes you do have a right to voice your opinion and it does appear well qualified ... but I have the same right. I'm not saying "circumcision is good", I'm not saying, "go out and do your boys"! I am saying that there are many of us who are quite happy and lead perfectly normal forfilled sex lives ... so lets show a little balance eh?

Ivan

I did read your post carefully. The thrust of it was "It's no big deal, one way or another." The problem is, it is a big deal. Here in the United States, it is an institutionalized practice. It is done routinely, for no medical reason, and there is a great amount of actual deception on the part of the medical establisHydromaxent to have it continue...all so that the $$$ keeps coming in. That is why people like me have to be loud. Our small voices have to be loud enough to overcome the chorus of misconceptions, myths and outright lies. You do not know how highly I commend you for leaving your son intact. All I can say is BRAVO! BRAVO! BRAVO! I do not understand why my viewpoint should cause anyone discomfort, because the practice -- as we have discovered-- is in fact 85% reversible. There are alot of men who are unhappy with their sex lives or do not know the source of their problems with sex like painful erections, erectile disfunction, lack of sensitivity and, yes, even small penises...the source is sometimes an overly tight circumcision. Unless these men are educated, they will never know what and how to fix it.

ivan i don't think the article was written to tell circed men that there sex lives are bad because of circumcision, but more of an informative for people to know what it does to you, and if people know the conciquences, then they can at least make a better decision when it comes to there children. And hopefully stop this barbaric and purely cosmetic procedure.

After having learned all that I've learned about circumsision since beginning Penis Enlargement 2 years ago, I have a strong urge to hunt down the doctor who circumsized me and just knocking him the fuck out. Sex is great right now, but if it could be 200% better with an intact foreskin, then that really just pisses me off.

One things for sure though, if I have a baby boy in the future and the doctor offers to circumsize him I'm going to go irate...there's no chance in hell I'll let my son be circumsized after knowing what I know now.

Educate your mate if you have children, papercut. It is not up to you. Here in the United States, only the mother has the right to choose whether her baby will be cut or uncut. It is sad but true. When my second child was born, I did not want him to be circumcised. I told my wife as much. When I left the hospital to go to work, she was approached with the release papers and talked into signing them. They told her it would be cleaner and healthier. What better way to hook a new mom than with the words "clean" and "healthy". When I returned and objected, the circumcising doctor smiled thinly at me and said, "Well, it's really not up to you, is it?" and did it anyway. I was not as educated on it as I am now, unfortunately. Had I known then what I know now, I would have torn that hospital apart, screaming "Malpractice Suit!" at the top of my lungs. My wife cried about it this year, when we learned the nasty truth in full and the reality of it finally sunk in. She made me promise to teach both our sons how to restore when they came of age. My oldest son, who is 17, has already begun to do it. He is still a virgin, but wants to be as close to natural as he can get so that he can have it done and out of the way when he meets that special someone. I did not make my oldest son do it, only presented the facts and the benefits of circumcision and restoration. My youngest is still too young. I will tell him about Penis Enlargement and restoration when he gets about 16, like his older brother.

Here in the UK, circumcision was the exception rather than the norm when I was born (and I'm pretty sure it's the same now). Is the fact that your health system is privately payed by the individual or insurance the main reason? Here, where our system is payed by the state, funded through our taxes, routine circumcision would be a waste of resourses and is therefore not practiced ... except where genuinely needed. Do you not think then, that a fundamental change to the way you pay for health care would end most operations carried out purely for profiteering? Our system is full of problems at the moment due to the governments unwillingness to put enough money in, and there apparent desire to copy much of your system. I can't help thinking that if we follow your example too closely then perhaps in the future we may suffer such malpractice as you describe.

I'm happy with my circumcision ... but I KNOW it was done for genuine medical reasons. I was obviously lucky that it was done by a skilled compitant doctor, as I suffered none of the problems described in the article or percieved lack of sensation. Certainly none more than I can imagine I'd want ... in other words, personally I think my dick is just as sensitive as I'd like. This obviously coloured my opinion on circumcision and might have made me sound flippant towards your views ... which believe me was never the case. I do concede that what you say is correct and the risks are real, I also applaud you for your stand and wish you the best of luck with your campaign to stop routine circumcision of males in America ... the not so free, land of the free!

Ivan

Don't worry Kong, when the time comes for me to settle down and help raise the population I'll definately make it known to my wife (whoever that may turn out to be, I hear Halle Berry is available these days) that uncut is much, much better then being cut. I'll simply present the facts as-is, and if she doesn't agree with me, then I'll just convince her to hold off until our son is old enough to make the decision for himself...That's the way something as important as circumsision should be handled in the first place. It should be left up to me whether or not some sadistic, knife-weilding son of a bitch gets to chop off one of the most important parts of my body....