[ ARC forum 2 ]

Certainly Should!

Written by Paul B. at 25 Mar 2002 11:43:07:

As an answer to: Should you be able to fully retract or not? PAUL B written by Steven at 24 Mar 2002 13:20:33:

I must say Jim puts it most eloquently - your partner "has no style". The impression you convey is that because she has had sex before, she consequently thinks she knows something about it. In fact, that's rather dubious and whether she said or she tried to "yank it back" (which is not quite clear from your typos), that is a somewhat unhelpful approach of which I doubt she would approve were you to apply that to any part of her genitals(, nipples, etc.).

AJ's reply is quite typical and what we have come to expect of him by now - he launches straight off into his circumcision advertising, as he does with any and almost every enquiry.

> i told her to go easy

As indeed you would!

> My question although repetitive is that should it be fully retracted if your uncircumcised or not?

Well, there's fully retracted, and there's fully retractable. I do think the latter is most desirable, as does Jim, and we therefore advise you to proceed with the stretching to complete the process you have apparently begun anyway.

> I dont really think its an issue of if your comfotable

Yes, as Jim and I again point out, there are by definition out there, and certainly a sample who post on these boards, many men, quite possibly millions on a world scale, who have an unretractile foreskin but manage with it for a lifetime, by and large perfectly happily. Such men have a glans that is particularly sensitive because that is how the body works - it enhances the sensitivity if it is covered all the time and conversely, substantially reduces it if it is covered none of the time as happens if one is either circumcised, or simply has a naturally short foreskin.

In any case, these men with a retractile foreskin can have intercourse not only comfortably, but enjoyably as I gather you indeed did on this occasion (did you not?), and (despite the remarkable claims of a somewhat infamous Australian circumcision enthusiast who used to haunt such fora as this) proceed to orgasm, ejaculate and consequently sire children as circumstances permit.

> but whether the sensation is enhanced? Do you know if it enhanced if it completely retracted?

Well, consider the elements. You have a glans which likes (in a figurative sense) being stroked but not rubbed. The form of stroking that is pleasurable is produced either by a lubricated rippled surface passing across it, or a soft skin rolling over it without rubbing. The latter description obviously relates to the foreskin and another way of seeing it is fairly obviously that the inside layer of the foreskin conforms to the glans, thus preventing rubbing, whilst the outer layer slides freely over this (being lubricated by the fluids in the tissues between).

Now of course, the former mention of a "lubricated rippled surface", describes the inside of a woman's vagina. However, one of the common difficulties during intercourse is that the woman may not be producing enough of that lubrication which should preferably be obvious wetting her knickers before you begin intercourse. An alternative surface with ripples, is the tightest part of the foreskin, and as you will know only too well, if you are with a woman and have an erection, the corresponding lubrication you yourself produce, tends to collect under your foreskin - if it is still forward, and this aids greatly the initial entry.

So there is an advantage to having a retractable but not necessarily retracted foreskin in intercourse. If you do, then as you thrust in the woman, the foreskin has the option of coming back with the thrust so that you do feel her vaginal ridges on your glans, but it can also come forward on each "back" stroke which not only feels good in itself as the foreskin "pops" back and forth with each thrust, over the glans (and in particular, the coronal flare at the back) which sensation includes those from both the glans and the foreskin, but this also tends to seal in as much of the lubrication as possible.

A fascinating "sexual myth" is that sex is all about strong stimulus to the glans, particularly the corona, and the stronger the better. While this may be tolerable to circumcised men, it is by no means pleasant except, one must say, to those who insist it is (which seems to be no more or less reasonable than those who like piercings or bindings and such in their penis and other parts). But it is this myth that is behind the curious assertions of the circumcision or "permanent retraction" enthusiasts who would have you believe that retraction is the ultimate objective - a bizarre parody perhaps of the "vaginal orgasm" for women.


Answers: