Needs To Be Said

Let's all get something straight. Nobody who's been circumcised "re grows" their "foreskin". That's a bullshit phrase, usually used by someone who's selling something. Your foreskin is gone (unless it was a teensy snip and most of the original is still present). It won't re grow. What is grown is a skin tube, made out of shaft skin. It may have a bit of old mucosa in it, if you spend a lot of effort biasing the tension to get this effect, and that is assuming you have any old mucosa left. Many don't because it was all taken during the circumcision. Many who do have some left, still won't get any measurable growth of mucosal tissue because not much of it was left.

So, no foreskin. A skin tube, which takes years of effort, will grow. That's fine, actually, because it will cover what you have left and give some benefit; more benefit than a lot of guys realize.

But having been on a number of forums, I'm aware of how uneducated and downright naive many guys are about this and lots of other issues about their bodies.

So, naive guys: no re growth of foreskin, but a growth of shaft skin that will roll out into a tube.

actually using light, long duration tension DOES facilitate growth of the remaining prepuce skin after circumcision as well as new shaft skin. That skin grows just the same as shaft skin. You may not have as many mucus and sebaceous glands in the new skin but you can regrow the skin. Especially if you use the right method (like a DTR, which I use). It's been well documented. Besides, its not so much the TYPenis Enlargement of skin grown but coverage of the glans that's the main factor in FR. Good to see you read up on the subject before you spoke (and I mean the actual clinical studies, not just anecdotal "evidence" on other forums).

TheStick;326403 said:

actually using light, long duration tension DOES facilitate growth of the remaining prepuce skin after circumcision as well as new shaft skin. That skin grows just the same as shaft skin. You may not have as many mucus and sebaceous glands in the new skin but you can regrow the skin. Especially if you use the right method (like a DTR, which I use). It's been well documented. Besides, its not so much the TYPenis Enlargement of skin grown but coverage of the glans that's the main factor in FR. Good to see you read up on the subject before you spoke (and I mean the actual clinical studies, not just anecdotal "evidence" on other forums).

Click to expand...

Actually, using light, long duration does NOT grow a new foreskin, regardless of how much you may want it to. As Distalero said, it grows a tube of skin. This skin may have some components of a foreskin, such as sebaceous glands. However, it is not a foreskin. For example, it has no rigid bands. Once again, it is not a foreskin.

I didn't say it you can grow a new foreskin. I said the remaining prepuce skin can be grown.

whats a rigid band? i have the same foreskin i had when i was born and i dont think i have any rigid bands?


so does that mean i dont have a foreskin!?!!

It may not be real foreskin, but it happens to be as close to real foreskin as on can get after being cut. That said I'm glad my parents did not allow anybody to touch my cock at birth. Even though I got laughed at in the locker room, I would not trade my foreskin for anything point blank.

Crazyed27, I can completely relate. At 36 years old I thanked my mother for not allowing me to be circumsised at birth. I too felt the ridicule of being uncut when the majority of males back in school were circumsised. Nick names like "dog dink" caused me to develop anxiety issues concerning my penis. But never did I envy a circumsised penis or wish to be circumsised. I am damned proud to be intact...I'd rather lose a nipple than my foreskin LOL.

oh hands down on losing a nipple first, i agree.

Distalero: we get it, we can't rebuild a foreskin. i think we all know thats impossible , like regrowing a foot.

but quit arguing semantics and let the fr-ers be. regardless, it is still self imporvement.

Well said, Ty. BTW Dist, a "rigid band" is called a meatus.

wtf is a rigid band!!

A ridged band is the skin that runs from the frenulum to the prepucial sphincter. It can usually be seen on uncut men when aroused and the glans is visible. It's that corrugated looking bit of foreskin on the underside of an uncut guy's penis just below the glans.

TheStick;326710 said:

Well said, Ty. BTW Dist, a "rigid band" is called a meatus.

Click to expand...

Did you really meant to say this? You realize it's nonsense; right? The meatus is the opening of the urethral passage. I can't believe anyone is that ignorant. You must be just looking for a rise out me or some other person here. Sorta backfired.

As for your comment on growing foreskin tissue, I already said that was possible if some was left, but most circumcisions still take all of that away (crushed or sliced off). Hence the common circ scar rather than a common circ flap.

So, only shaft skin is left to expand. Not foreskin. Seems a simple concept to me.

Ridged bands DON'T run from the frenulum to the opening of the foreskin, they run perpendicular to that direction. I wonder: who really needs to study just a little anatomy.

Excellent, you caught that. lol. It's fun to throw out some BS and see if anyone catches it (shit like the penis is a muscle, etc.). The ridged band thing, sorry I forgot to throw in perpendicular to adequately explain.

Actually it didn't backfire. In fact it worked out exactly as I'd hoped. Good eye, man. Aren't anonymous forums fun? It never ceases to surprise me how people get so worked up in these things. Funny shit.

http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/

For anyone wondering.