[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by Jim at 29 Jul 2003 04:17:18: The big problem
As an answer to: Re: What are you talking about? written by Robin at 29 Jul 2003 01:23:46:
You are diametrically opposed in your way of analysing these situations. I see the glass half full; you see it half empty. I see solutions; you see problems. Until your paradigm shifts, you will have trouble understanding me and my way of solving problems.
The correct terminology for the part of the anatomy in question has always, to the best of my knowledge, been frenar band. Phimosis is a term which generally indicates that the frenar band is too tight to allow any retraction. In the case of this young man, he can retract half-way, so I would hestitate to call that phimosis or even partial phimosis. My view is that he is simply late in natural development, and that is within normal bounds. Obviously, reading your material, I see that you think development needs to be tinkered with if it doesn't come on early in life. I understand your thinking, but don't agree with it. Just as other aspects of development differ among individuals, so can the development of the penis.
Yes, you could be wrong. So could I, but how I avoid a problem with that is in questioning the subject along the way as progress procedes. The terminology "frenulum breve" is variously defined, depending upon the views of the person using the term. In my view, such terminology would indicate a severe restriction of retraction, even in the flacid state. If you wish to say it can restrict only in the erect state, that's fine. As I say, I prefer to see the glass half full, so I see the solution easily attainable, and it's interesting that when the guys do the exercises, they prove it. I'm curious why you would find such results to be dubious?