No announcement yet.

2017-03-05 Circumcised men who want their foreskins back

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 2017-03-05 Circumcised men who want their foreskins back

    Kind of a middle of the road article from a Malaysian paper. Okay, other than the description of nonsurgical restoration as painful.
    Visit my restoration progress journal.

  • #2
    I understand that it could've been the usual deriding article we've all seen, but I wouldn't call it middle of the road, just for the reason you mention. More than one reference to pain, which is false, and a reference in the last sentence to a tugged penis as "poor", implying that tugging is torture and damage (which is referred to using that word, earlier in the ariticle). We know better. Restoration is the opposite of damage.

    And I have to say that the idea that so-called restoration restores "glanular" sensation as the primary goal, is yet again that old idea that comes from circumcision culture. It isn't the glans, with it's lack of meissner corpuscles (unless that's the only mucosa you're left with, and even then you still have a corona), it's revitalized inner foreskin mucosa, and the sensation of moving expanded skin; that's the real prize. Someday, some journalist will get it all right, and maybe even touch on the questions surrounding RIC. Asking a lot, I know, but it can be done if the journalist doesn't take a personal stance.


    • #3
      Since the majority of the population of Malaysia is Muslim, it wouldn't surprise me if there's more of a bias toward circumcision, and little or no public awareness of foreskin restoration. It appears that the doctor got all his information from some quick research on the internet, considering the amount of irrelevant history on the subject. While the answer he provides isn't the greatest, he is talking about it instead of dismissing the questioner's concern outright. That's progress.