Male Initiation and the Phimosis Taboos

UNDERSTANDING PHIMOSIS

ITS CONSEQUENCES AND EARLY PREVENTION
March 2021 - 808 words

Of all the problems in today's world –
phimosis would be the easiest to resolve.

There are many degrees and combinations of the different forms of phimosis. In Germany, phimosis was found in 8.8% of boys [1]. However, this statistic excludes figures for short frenulum; or for relative phimosis, which can only be observed during erection.

Statistics for short frenulum are only measured in boars at 5.7% [2] and bulls at 2% [3]. Although the os penis is a different structure, phimosis is also problematic and farm animals are monitored by the British Breeding Association because "Copulation failure in food animals can be economically devastating to producers."[4]

The most prestigious and influential study in the English-speaking world gives statistics between 1% and 2% [5]. It was conducted over a period of seven years, with boys being monitored and educated about foreskins every year.

The doctor who wrote the study reports this, but did not take into account that his monitoring and education clearly raised awareness, and in turn that this may well have encouraged the boys to experiment with and stretch their own foreskins.

It is common medical knowledge that phimosis causes pain and difficulty when retracting the foreskin. This often happens at the beginning of puberty or during first sexual intercourse and is the main indication for circumcision. These painful and difficult sexual experiences have hardly ever been researched.

Why does our culture allow such painful difficulties to happen in the first place? Even if treated promptly, such spoiled and painful first intimate experiences are guaranteed to leave disturbing memories.

However, maybe such cases are the lucky ones. Healthy, non-masochistic boys avoid pain and difficulty and thus develop avoidance behaviours.

In 1990, Beauge [6] described the mechanics of masturbation with the avoidance behaviour inherent with phimosis. He never discussed the sexual fantasies associated with these forms of masturbation. But his research proved that gentle stretching of the phimotic ring can usually alleviate the anotomical condition.

Even in early childhood, a young boy with epithelial adhesions sticking the foreskin to the glans, will avoid the pain (and danger) of forcefully breaking them. Whereas an uninhibited boy will freely pull on and play with his "bottle nose dolphin" in the bathtub.

Following puberty, the anatomical inhibition of the foreskin has a direct and active effect on self pleasuring behaviour. Phimosis preconditions the sexual behaviour, fantasy, and the consequent social behaviour.

Each specific phimotic condition has a specific effect. Masturbation in the flaccid state does not support penetrative fantasies. The potential pain of the frenulum or relative phimosis stimulates and associates with subconscious fear of sex. A tighter phimotic ring directly restricts stimulation and awareness of the glans – and though imagination plays the largest role in sexual matters, if the corporeal self-awareness is limited, then the imaginative fantasy will also be limited.

All these conditions physiologically inhibit the full and normal potential of the anatomical member – and a psychological attitude of openness, versatility, and fulfilment in sexual fantasy and behaviour.

Phimosis stimulates and supports all forms of non-penetrative, inhibited and deviant sex, from dominas' slaves to paedophilia. Basically, it reinforces tendencies towards loneliness and confusion, and it wastes love.

This is a deeply seated chaos factor in our culture. And these days it's senseless: The modern solution to phimosis would be a few drops of an enzyme solution to release any stubborn painful epithelial adhesions between glans and foreskin, at an early age. This would enable infant boys to play with and stretch any tightness out of their own foreskin.

This has never been researched, however there is a starting point in the anthropological literature. Felix Bryk a renowned anthropogist tells us "Among the inhabitants of Tahiti, the boys use their urine, which is trapped in the foreskin pocket, to loosen and widen the foreskin, which is otherwise firmly attached to their glans."[7]

It is common urological knowledge that "Separation (of the epithelial adhesions) results from keratinization of the cells under the influence of androgen"[8]

Male urine is rich in androgen. Therefore, a few drops of an androgen enzyme solution administered with some regularity at an early age – would enable boys to self-cure phimotic foreskin.

The earlier a boy can develop a pain-free, comfortable relationship with his essential physical and anatomical masculinity, the greater the chance is that he will develop a healthy relationship with his own body, mind, and with others.

References

[1] Schöberlein Dr. Med. Werner; 1966 "Bedeutung und Haufigkeit von Phimose und Smegma" Münchener Medizinische Wochenschrift; 7, p. 373 - 377 / Translation R. Stuart: "The Significance and Frequency of Phimosis and Smegma"

[2] Wohlfarth E; 1990 "Zur Persistenz des Frenulum praeputii beim Eber" Berl Munch Tierarztl Wochenschr.; Dec 1;103(12):406-9 / Translation R Stuart: “Persistence of the Preputial Frenulum in Boars" "Due to Persistent Frenulum praeputii, the inability to fertilise was found among 5.7% of breeding boars."

[3] Spitzer JC et al; 1988 "Breeding Soundness Examination of yearling beef bulls" J Am Vet Med Assoc Nov 1;193(9):1075-9 "Yearling beef bulls were subjected to a breeding soundness examination . . . 862 bulls, . . . Of 109 bulls classified as unsatisfactory, 16.5% had persistent penile frenulum." (i,e. 16.5% of 109 unsatisfactory = 18. 18 of 862 = 2.09% overall)

[4] St Jean G; 1995 "Male Reproductive Surgery" Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract Mar;11(1):55-93

[5] Øster Jacob; 1968 "Further Fate of the Foreskin" Archives of Disease in Childhood British Medical Association, April 43:p.200-203 / Relevant Quotes / Full Text

[6] Beauge Michel M.D.; 1991 "Traitment Medical du Phimosis Congenital de l'adolescent" Quimper, France. Thesis for the University Diploma of Andrology. Director of Studies Professor G. Arvis. Faculty of Medicine Saint-Antoine University Paris V1 University Year 1990-1991 / Relevant Quotes / Full translation by Dr J. P. Warren: "Conservative Treatment of primary Phimosis in Adolescents"

[7] Bryk Felix; 1931 "Die Beschneidung bei Mann und Weib" Gustav Feller. New Brandenburg. Saite 173. "Bei den Einwohnern von Tahiti verwenden die Jungen ihren in der Vorhautstasche eingestauten Harn zur Auflockerung und Erweiterung der sonst an ihrer Eichel fest anhaftenden Vorhaut." Translation DeepL.com "Among the inhabitants of Tahiti, the boys use their urine, which is trapped in the foreskin pocket, to loosen and widen the foreskin, which is otherwise firmly attached to their glans." / Full Translation : David Berger MA "Circumcision in Man and Woman" American Ethnological Press New York (1934) AMS Press (1974) p. 202.

[8] Øster [5] quoting : Burrows, H; 1944 "The Union and Separation of Living Tissues as Influenced by Cellular Differentiation" Yale J. Bil. Med.,17,397. "Separation results from keratinization of the cells under the influence of androgen"

Extra-Notes
Cultural
From Greek and Roman times until the late 1800s, there was no readily available treatment for phimosis – still in modern times there is very little awareness.

In animal herds phimosis is probably an advantage, because some alpha animals do not compete for mating status, and are thus free to take care of the group.

But in a monogamous society, it means that both males and females are influenced by it. Over generations, 10% would have an inhibiting effect on an entire culture.

Anthropological
The anthropological question about the origin of routine male circumcision has never been resolved. The idea that phimosis was the origin was rejected because it was thought a rarity; this happened before any statistical study was available.

Statistical studies are only valid when conducted among large groups. Schöberlein's study showing a frequency of 8.8% was made among 3,000 males [1].

Male circumcision dates from around 40,000 years ago, we know this from the traditional, sacred tools still in usage. 40,000 years ago people lived in small groups of around 30 people, with 15 males. In such small groups fluctuating frequencies are to be expected. Phimosis can cause problems in childhood, middle age or old age.

Under such circumstances, it is to be expected that there would be occasions when no-one would suffer phimosis, and times when it was prolific. At such prolific times, we could expect any wise elder concerned for the well being and propagation of his people, to introduce the practical traditional measure of the partial circumcision.

OLD INDEX PAGE – Male Initiation and the Phimosis Taboos
2020 SUMMARY – The Four Chapters of the Original Site

 

 

ORIGINAL SITE

Technical
You'll need an old fashioned desktop screen to read all the other pages.

Welcome
Chapter One: The Conditions
Chapter Two: From Innocence to Ignorance
Library of Letters and Case Histories
Chapter Three: Anthropology
Chapter Four: Solutions

If this subject interests or concerns you – please Contact Me