Importance of retaining?

[perfect collar]

What's the argument for doing this? I can't understand how it would "train" your skin into a taper. It seems like the only thing it'll do is prematurely dekeratinize the glans, which doesn't sound like something one would want before achieving coverage

[alinz07]

I would also like to know the answer to this question. I’ve been restoring consistently for almost 2 months now and wear a tugger 10-12 hrs a day (with gentle tension and following the 4 hr rule very well). I also retain when I go to bed until I wake up to pee in the middle of the night and if I wake up before my alarm, I’ll put the retainer back on until the alarm goes off. I’ve already started to notice a much shinier glans. I’m not sure it’s more sensitive yet and not sure if this is dekeratinization, but it hasn’t caused me any problems that I’m aware of. But if it could lead to problems, I’d like to know now!

[greg_b]

I would agree with you, the purpose is to dekeratinize sooner than will happen through restoration. But whether one might want this to happen or not, depends upon the individual and how they weight or value different things. Many men retain and seem quite happy with it. Others do not, and also seem quite happy. Just do what you would like, personal preference.

[4SkinGuy]

I don't retain and my penis is fine. So I guess it's just personal preference?

[admin]

I can't understand how it would "train" your skin into a taper.

All of the body is always undergoing cell replication. So even non-restorers experience skin cell divisions to replace about A MILLION skin cells per day.

Every time a parent cell divides to become two daughter cells, those daughters occupy roughly the same space as the defunct parent cell. But as they plump up and mature the daughters must "choose" an alignment with respect to each other. That alignment can be oriented longways, girthwise, or thicknesswise, or some combination of these vectors.

While we retain the skin over the glans 24/7 we invoke a mild stress in the skin to force it into our desired puckered-forward-of-the-glans shape. So if a division occurs while that stress is active, then the daughter cells are most likely to choose an orientation that lines up in the direction that minimizes that stress. That would be longways.

Again, even non-restorers experience these cell divisions. But if the average non-restoring cell division could yield any 'ole random alignment (to maintain the shape of our body's skin suit) and the retained-skin cell divisions yield MORE longways alignments, that means retaining leads to FEWER girthwise and/or thicknesswise alignments.

What I'm saying is that retaining CAN contribute to a narrower neatly puckered skin tube. It would certainly explain this NSFW image of my pucker.
This was taken 3 hours after I removed my retaining cone and biked naked through Chicago at a Climate Change protest last summer. I stopped tugging in 2006 but I wear the retaining cone to bed every night (and many days, depending on how far from ready privacy I'll be).

So I say retain every non-tugging minute until you like the shape of your fauxskin.

the only thing it'll do is prematurely dekeratinize the glans

The protection afforded by your skin to the glans - so it can revert to being shiny and supple - is quite a plus:

doesn't sound like something one would want before achieving coverage

I can't imagine why not. We all deserve better sex, like yesterday. Why wait? If you'll be retaining during all non-tugging minutes, when is your newly ticklish glans causing problems?

[z726]

Dekeratinization doesn't necessarily happen all at once. It's more likely for small amounts to happen gradually - or at least, that's been my experience. If you're not retaining constantly, then the glans does dry out on the surface again when you leave it uncovered. There have been restorers here who have had keratinization so thick that it visibly peeled away, but I'm guessing that's more likely a result of constant retaining, as well as a device that keeps the glans covered and moist.

Neither retaining nor tugging methods can affect the way the skin grows and tapers around the glans. Personally, I would discourage any discussion about dermatology here - first, because it really doesn't make a difference in what we're doing, and second, because it sounds a bit like speculative medical advice (sorry, Ron). Every single restoring method or device does essentially the same thing, by tugging on the skin, and if we grow it long enough, it'll end up hanging over the glans and puckering up at the end.

[admin]

We know that making a body part conform to a constraint can cause that part to gradually take on the shape of that constraint.

[z726]

We know that making a body part conform to a constraint can cause that part to gradually take on the shape of that constraint.

Foot binding was completely different. Constraining the shape of a child's foot prevented the bones from growing into their normal adult size, shape and alignment. It's a reminder that people elsewhere in the world did some terrible things to people's bodies for ridiculous reasons.

But we're only talking about skin, in our case. There's already enough of it to fit around your shaft, as seen in your second photo. If retaining somehow caused the diameter of the opening to shrink, you wouldn't be able to retract it so easily (or at all).

[MG22Restorer]

Dekeratinization doesn't necessarily happen all at once. It's more likely for small amounts to happen gradually - or at least, that's been my experience. If you're not retaining constantly, then the glans does dry out on the surface again when you leave it uncovered. There have been restorers here who have had keratinization so thick that it visibly peeled away, but I'm guessing that's more likely a result of constant retaining, as well as a device that keeps the glans covered and moist.

Neither retaining nor tugging methods can affect the way the skin grows and tapers around the glans. Personally, I would discourage any discussion about dermatology here - first, because it really doesn't make a difference in what we're doing, and second, because it sounds a bit like speculative medical advice (sorry, Ron). Every single restoring method or device does essentially the same thing, by tugging on the skin, and if we grow it long enough, it'll end up hanging over the glans and puckering up at the end.

"Personally, I would discourage any discussion about dermatology here - first, because it really doesn't make a difference in what we're doing, and second, because it sounds a bit like speculative medical advice"

Could not disagree more. I would def encourage discussion about dermatology and skin on a forum about tugging... the skin. You do not have to be a doctor to discuss this relatively new area of foreskin restoration.

"Neither retaining nor tugging methods can affect the way the skin grows and tapers around the glans."

There just is not enough evidence to make this claim definitively whatsoever, but I understand why people would want to come to this conclusion. It makes people think they can get the same results without putting in the effort of constant retaining, or that all tugging methods will yield nearly identical results such that you will never have to worry about the specific methods you are using.

By Ron, 'We know that making a body part conform to a constraint can cause that part to gradually take on the shape of that constraint."

This is just indisputable, regardless of your POV on whether retaining can assist in training the skin to "pucker". No, you do not have to have bones involved for the body to conform to a constraint over time. It is just an example, as there are examples involving only the skin as well.

"If retaining somehow caused the diameter of the opening to shrink, you wouldn't be able to retract it so easily (or at all)."

This is a bit fallacious because even intact people, who exhibit a pucker, can still have an easy time retracting the foreskin. Just because you cannot get phimosis from retaining does NOT mean it cannot aid in forcing the skin to conform to a particular shape over time.