Discussion Does anyone else have suppressed rage regarding their circumcision?

[DolerDolerDoler]

I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere here, but I guess men generally just accept what was done to them as a child?

There are dedicated communities regarding grief around this along with resolutions so I do assume people just aggregate there instead, but I also feel that it is the most wide spread silent suffering

 

[Artemisia]

I'm female and European, so it's not really for me to say but I'll say it anyway. Here it's extremely rare and definitely not the norm like in the USA. I find the idea of mutilating children (anyone really, but if adults want it it's their choice) absolutely abject. Here it was very common to pierce the ears of baby girls and even that has stopped. There's absolutely no reason to mutilate little boys, even if a bit of skin doesn't seem that much. And no, it's not for hygienic reasons. European men don't have more infections and problems due to not being circuncized.

 

[sugarb]

I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere here, but I guess men generally just accept what was done to them as a child?

There are dedicated communities regarding grief around this along with resolutions so I do assume people just aggregate there instead, but I also feel that it is the most wide spread silent suffering

I personally don't care in the slightest that I was circumcised but I do think it's wrong and really shouldn't be done to babies. It's a form of genital mutilation, not to mention performing any sort of unnecessary procedure on newborns is arguably endangerment.

 

[Not A Fan]

I live in the US and I guess it is still a standard practice here. My parents aren't religious so I assume it was just performed by default...? I don't really know how these things work, I don't have children of my own (by choice.)

It's never bothered me because I don't remember it happening, and haven't ever suffered any ill consequences from it.

It does seem like a rather arcane and questionable cultural practice though. I guess in the secular context is done in the context of its supposed hygiene advantages?

I can certainly see why someone would be upset about it. It's your body and you weren't given a choice. For some reason it's just not something I've ever had any strong feeling about.

With or without my foreskin, my life would basically be at the same point.

 

[Edpal247]

European men don't have more infections and problems due to not being circuncized.

True, but their women DO - various studies have shown higher rates of cervical cancer and vaginal infection amoung women who have uncorcumsized partners. The foreskin holds a lot of bacteria in there and the glans/head of the penis emits "smegma", which is sort of like swea designed to lubricate "the head". Perfect bacteria food.

Me - no , I'm "cut" and have no issue with it nor do I think about it, ever. There ARE groups of men who use various devices to try to stretch the remaining sking back into a bit of a foreskin. Some of them are LIVID they don't have it. Serious, Google "foreskin recovery". Part way down the results you will start to see some of the devices they try. A dude I know isvery involved in the recovery movement and in one group in particular. They have meetings and show each other their progress. Serious. Me and myy friends have some creative names for their group. *Most of these devices use springs or elastic to pull at the skin all day., To each their own!

 

[MyTimeIsUp]

True, but their women DO - various studies have shown higher rates of cervical cancer and vaginal infection amoung women who have uncorcumsized partners. The foreskin holds a lot of bacteria in there and the glans/head of the penis emits "smegma", which is sort of like swea designed to lubricate "the head". Perfect bacteria food.

Cervical cancer is not caused by this, stop spreading misinformation. If this was accurate, awareness would be spread. I have never heard such crap in my life.

If men washed their penises more, then infection is less likely. It isn't difficult now, is it? Women wash beforehand, why can't men? Teach boys how to wash when they're little, then when they are an adult, their basic hygiene would have already been sorted. Simple

Most men I've been with have been uncircumcised, and they were clean. If a man is dirty, a woman can see and smell that straight away, and won't go near. Disgusting.

Uncircumcised doesn't equal dirty. Get your facts right.

 

[Not A Fan]

Serious, Google "foreskin recovery". Part way down the results you will start to see some of the devices they try. A dude I know isvery involved in the recovery movement and in one group in particular. They have meetings and show each other their progress. Serious. Me and myy friends have some creative names for their group. *Most of these devices use springs or elastic to pull at the skin all day., To each their own!

What is the underlying motivation? Are they trying to make their dicks look bigger or is supposed to restore lost sexual functions? Is that an actual treatment or just some DIY shit people came up with on social media?

Edit: a historical overview, not a social media fad after all.

Spoiler: foreskin history lesson

In the Greco-Roman world, intact genitals, including the foreskin, were considered a sign of beauty, civility, and masculinity.[2] In Classical Greek and Roman societies (8th century BC to 6th century AD), exposure of the glans was considered disgusting and improper, and did not conform to the Hellenistic ideal of gymnastic nudity.[2] Men with short foreskins would wear the kynodesme to prevent exposure.[3] As a consequence of this social stigma, an early form of foreskin restoration known as epispasm was practiced among some Jews in Ancient Rome (8th century BC to 5th century AD).[4]

Foreskin restoration is of ancient origin and dates back to the Alexandrian Empire (333 BC). Males participated in the gymnasium nude and because the Greeks did not practice circumcision anyone who was circumcised was socially shunned. Hellenized Jews stopped circumcising their sons to avoid persecution and so they could participate in the gymnasium. Some Jews at this time attempted to restore their foreskins. This caused conflict within Second Temple Judaism, some Jews viewed circumcision as an essential part of the Jewish identity (1 Maccabees 1:15).[5] Following the death of Alexander, Judea and the Levant was part of the Seleucid Empire under Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164 BC). Antiochus outlawed the Jewish practice of circumcision, both 1st and 2nd Maccabees records Jewish mothers being put to death for circumcising their sons (1:60-61 and 6:10 respectively).[6] Some Jews during Antiochus' persecution sought to undo their circumcision.[7] Within the 1st century A.D., there was still some forms of foreskin restoration being sought after (1 Corinthians 7:18). During the third Jewish-Roman Wars (AD 132–135), the Romans had renamed Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolian and may have banned circumcision; however, Roman sources from the period only mention castration and say nothing about banning circumcision. During the Bar Kokhba revolt, there is Rabbinic evidence that records, Jews who had removed their circumcision (meaning that foreskin restoration was still being practiced) they were recircumcised, voluntarily or by force.[8] Again, during World War II, some European Jews sought foreskin restoration to avoid Nazi persecution.[9]

I guess escaping from the nazis is a good reason. Can't argue with that.

 

[locked*n*loaded]

Circumcision is done as a hygiene measure mostly, so the skin isn't folded over creating a place where bacteria can grow. It also just looks better, imo. I have no issues that I was circumcised.

 

[potablewater784]

I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere here, but I guess men generally just accept what was done to them as a child?

There are dedicated communities regarding grief around this along with resolutions so I do assume people just aggregate there instead, but I also feel that it is the most wide spread silent suffering

I'm wouldn't say that I'm "livid" about my parents' choice, but I certainly do get upset thinking about it from time to time. I would certainly prefer to not have been circumcised. Some people defend it with supposed health benefits, but these are all very questionable at best. I don't remember where I heard this, but some say that circumcision is "a solution in search of a problem".

 

[Edpal247]

What is the underlying motivation? Are they trying to make their dicks look bigger or is supposed to restore lost sexual functions? Is that an actual treatment or just some DIY shit people came up with on social media?

Edit: a historical overview, not a social media fad after all.

Spoiler: foreskin history lesson

In the Greco-Roman world, intact genitals, including the foreskin, were considered a sign of beauty, civility, and masculinity.[2] In Classical Greek and Roman societies (8th century BC to 6th century AD), exposure of the glans was considered disgusting and improper, and did not conform to the Hellenistic ideal of gymnastic nudity.[2] Men with short foreskins would wear the kynodesme to prevent exposure.[3] As a consequence of this social stigma, an early form of foreskin restoration known as epispasm was practiced among some Jews in Ancient Rome (8th century BC to 5th century AD).[4]

Foreskin restoration is of ancient origin and dates back to the Alexandrian Empire (333 BC). Males participated in the gymnasium nude and because the Greeks did not practice circumcision anyone who was circumcised was socially shunned. Hellenized Jews stopped circumcising their sons to avoid persecution and so they could participate in the gymnasium. Some Jews at this time attempted to restore their foreskins. This caused conflict within Second Temple Judaism, some Jews viewed circumcision as an essential part of the Jewish identity (1 Maccabees 1:15).[5] Following the death of Alexander, Judea and the Levant was part of the Seleucid Empire under Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164 BC). Antiochus outlawed the Jewish practice of circumcision, both 1st and 2nd Maccabees records Jewish mothers being put to death for circumcising their sons (1:60-61 and 6:10 respectively).[6] Some Jews during Antiochus' persecution sought to undo their circumcision.[7] Within the 1st century A.D., there was still some forms of foreskin restoration being sought after (1 Corinthians 7:18). During the third Jewish-Roman Wars (AD 132–135), the Romans had renamed Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolian and may have banned circumcision; however, Roman sources from the period only mention castration and say nothing about banning circumcision. During the Bar Kokhba revolt, there is Rabbinic evidence that records, Jews who had removed their circumcision (meaning that foreskin restoration was still being practiced) they were recircumcised, voluntarily or by force.[8] Again, during World War II, some European Jews sought foreskin restoration to avoid Nazi persecution.[9]

I guess escaping from the nazis is a good reason. Can't argue with that.

They claim the "head" of the penis is desensitized by rubbing on pants, etc, and they would enjoy sex more if part of the day it was more ocvered. I think they also want a little more size in that area. Most of the proponents seem to be gay dudes but idk. This was just my contribution to an unusual topic. imo.