[ ARC forum 2 ]

Re: Missed it entirely.

Written by Ivan at 11 Mar 2003 18:38:55:

As an answer to: Re: Missed it entirely. written by Harmen at 11 Mar 2003 14:24:16:

My that was lucid. After what many of the pro-cut comments have been like, this is a breath of fresh air (and I know your position is not entirely pro-cut, but more so than, say Ral or Rood)

>Let me try to explain my thoughts about stretching. The stretching of skin can have results. It’s based on the regeneration of damaged cells. The body is capable of restoring damages and if you use this function in the right way, you will get new cells in a greater number.

I am sure you know this, but for those following along, it should be noted that this is also how muscles grow when you exercise them: they get tiny little tears as effort is demanded of them, and they repair themselves better prepared to meet the demands which necessitated repair. This is why for most muscles, it is recommended that you have a day between workouts of a particular muscle - you need time to repair.

< A foreskin without infections can be changed in this way. Discipline and patience are required, but it's no garantee for succes. It doesn't work in all cases.

In fection can hinder, but whether it will work in all cases is not a matter of opinion: it is a proposition susceptible of proof through testing (although it would be hard to set up a double-blind test - you'd have to set up a group that didn't know whether there foreskins were being pulled or not - maybe if they were comatose.

>Parts of the skin, which have different functions, are built different too. For instance the wrappers in your knees are far less elastic. They must be able to handle heavy forces and wouldn’t work if the material was softer.

I don't want to quibble but ... really. The tendons of our knees handle great forces, of course, but the skin? If you mean they get scuffed and stressed when we crawl or do other things on our knees, then the skin of the knees (which starts out on babies as tender and supple as any) responds by callousing, as does any other part exposed to rubbing.

< The frenulum has a comparable function, but not with those heavy forces. However, that’s relatively. It sure is a tie of different material than the foreskin.

Really? Again that is a proposition susceptible of proof. I am not the anatomist who can say whether the frenula of either the penis or the tongue are entirely composed of skin just like the surrounding skin, made stronger by the doubling over and the stresses placed on them, or if there is perhaps a tendon within the skin. I have heard there is nothing but skin, blood and nerves in both, but I am open to citations to authoritative sources.

< Stretching results are very unlikely because of the other kind of skin and the problem of the impossibility to stretch during a rather long time in a regular rhythm. You need several hours a day. Who can? So I don’t expect too much of the stretching advises of the frenulum and keep an open mind for other solutions.

I tend to doubt your assessment of the time needed, and particularly the requirement of a regular rhythm. While most often any needed loosening of both frenulum and foreskin are accomplished by both masturbation and intercourse, there is no particular need for rhythmic motion - steady stress works too. That has been demonstrated many times.

> A short frenulum can spoil much fun. The tie-function of the frenulum is not very important. It can be missed without any problems. It’s certainly not an exception if it’s short. In that condition it causes troubles or it gives a too limited retraction of the foreskin.

Okay, these are opinions - for me, the retraction function is quite important. And what constitutes a 'short' frenulum depends much on attitudes about how your penis 'should' be. You prefer something you call 'smooth' - okay, that's your preference.

Well, the sensitivity is very important, but I like the retraction too. I agree with the rest of this basically, although I am unsure of the risks.

>On this forum many members do not agree with my point of view. I think that’s shortsighted. There were many discussions in the past and I’d rather not give it a new birth, but that will be an illusion. I also like skinning back, not to look like a circumcised person but for the good feelings it gives me. This forum may have other thoughts about this subject, but you should not force it to me. Besides, it won’t help.

Yes, and of course you are entitled to your opinion. However, it is important for those of different opinions, or who have contrary information, to express these differences because this is a publis forum. At a social get-together, if you announced these opinions, I might say no more than "To each his own," but in a publis debate forum, it is important to express disagreement, so that the impressionable who read these sites know that there are differing opinions. Please do not take it personally, not too much anyway.

>I realise that the circumcision discussion only takes place in some countries, not in mine. In the Netherlands only 5 % is circumcised, most of them for medical or religious reasons. Most of the doctors I know don’t push in that direction. It’s your own choice and they only advise, often not to do it if it’s unnecessary.

I wish this were true in the U.S.A.


Answers: