# 6 moving photo gifs & 3 brief video clips of real penises showing foreskin mobility



## painfulquestioning

If you are curious as to how the foreskin functions but do not have access to your own or your partner's, then you may find it helpful to view the moving photo gifs and video clips of real penises demonstrating their foreskin movement from several different views. Feel free to save and share them if it will be helpful in encouraging people not to be afraid of men with complete genitalia.

http://www.geocities.com/painfulques...turalresources

If you are or know an intact man who would like to make a moving photo gif or video clip of themselves for the sake of educating others, then please send me a message. I would love to add more to show the variety.

I have since added four additional pages to the site:

Weapons, Circumstraints and Baby Circumsisions Photo Collection:
www.geocities.com/painfulquestioning/unnatural

Comprehensive Link Collection:
www.geocities.com/painfulquestioning/links

Videos(27 of the most useful for intactivism -- if anyone wants to save any of the videos to their own computer, just ask and I'll email them):
www.geocities.com/painfulquestioning/videos

And Personal Stories/Quotes:
www.geocities.com/painfulquestioning/stories


----------



## Fi.

bump bump


----------



## titania8

ok, i thought it was 'animated' as in cartoon-y! not actual live penises!







still good info though. better actually. i've seen cartoon penises retract and glide, but not real ones. what a funny thing to talk about!!


----------



## bdavis337

Ok.......WOW. Can I admit here that I have never seen an intact adult penis before? Seriously. I've got a circed husband and 2 circed boys and that's just......damn, that's cool. Now I know how much they've lost too (HOLY CRAP). Wow. Thanks for posting that.


----------



## jesrox

WOW that is incredible!! I've only been intimate with my fiance, who is circ'd...I never really grasped how much skin is removed until now~ I guess I didn't really understand the whole concept of retraction


----------



## Peacemamalove

Thanks so much for sharing. This is definitely something that will be used to help educate others in the function of the foreskin.

It was nice to see actual penises and how they are all different.


----------



## Daisyuk

That's brilliant - no one can deny any "gliding action" now, or indeed the colossal amount of skin that is removed, or the beautiful shiny colour and texture of an intact man's glans. Glans are meant to be snuggled, covered and protected from the harsh outside world, women and men are meant to have the benefit of that gliding action to protect them from excess friction. Foreskins are there for several very good reasons.


----------



## jessjgh1

These should be added up in the stickies/resources.

I'm assuming there's no problem with listing them, as long as there is an explanation (or warning) as to the nature of the photos, etc.?

Jessica


----------



## kldliam

Quote:

DaisyUK: That's brilliant - no one can deny any "gliding action" now, or indeed the colossal amount of skin that is removed, or the beautiful shiny colour and texture of an intact man's glans. Glans are meant to be snuggled, covered and protected from the harsh outside world, women and men are meant to have the benefit of that gliding action to protect them from excess friction. Foreskins are there for several very good reasons.

Well put Daisy!

To OP: i hope some American woman now understand what they are robbing their son's of. This makes a circ'd penis look very disabled indeed!


----------



## Revamp

I'm sort of torn between thinking that it is understandable not to know until you see and wondering exactly _how_ people thought that it worked if not back-and-forth.


----------



## incorrigible

.


----------



## LittleRockstar

So much for the "just-a-piece-of-skin" justification. This clearly shows some of the functions and several veins. How could anyone looks at this and think it's just skin?


----------



## tammyswanson

Wow, never saw one of those before (I mean uncut!). Geez, they sure do cut a LOT OFF! OMG! I also think that the articles about using foreskin cells in facial cream was uh...enlightening to say the least. No wonder doctors encourage some people to circ their babies..then they sell the skin to these companies. Yeech! And I thought using whale vomit in lipstick had been a nasty practice..


----------



## Papai

Quote:


Originally Posted by *incorrigible* 
hey look...my first time looking at porn online.









At least it was for a good cause though. So, I have a ? now....does the foreskin only retract enough to uncover the glans, or the shaft too? I thought in the condom discussion, one suggestion was to pull it back and get the condom under the foreskin but on the shaft...and I'm thinking I may have misunderstood.

It uncovers a little of the shaft that's underneath the head.

I don't need to look at these pictures, I already know how all that stuff works.


----------



## Tinker

So that's what it looks like! It just LOOKS like that's the way things are supposed to be. Too bad for us American women!


----------



## kldliam

Quote:

Tinker: Too bad for us American women!
Even worse for Ameican men! Humor me here moms. Imagine being a man. Would you want to have a "fully loaded" penis or one that is half the fun??? I imagine a circ'd penis is a lot less interesting to use than an intact one.

So sad that SOOOOOOOOOO many Americans are so deluded about this.


----------



## Tinker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam* 
Even worse for Ameican men! Humor me here moms. Imagine being a man. Would you want to have a "fully loaded" penis or one that is half the fun??? I imagine a circ'd penis is a lot less interesting to use than an intact one.

So sad that SOOOOOOOOOO many American's are so deluded about this.

"fully loaded" kinda sounds like a spiffy new car with all the bells and whistles. hehehe.

The only thing I could imagine that would even come close, is if WE had to endure FGM and had no clitoris. Being as how I DO have one the thought of not having one is kind of like "What's the point?" So yeah I get it. I do feel bad for the men.


----------



## yokosmile

This is definitely a great resource, thanks for posting it!


----------



## CaraNicole

_wow i guess it really is 10 square inches that gets removed! i really think DS' wife will thank me one day!







well if he decides to keep it b/c you know it's so horrible to be intact!







: thanks for posting this link!_


----------



## incorrigible

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Papai* 
It uncovers a little of the shaft that's underneath the head.









Cool. ty for the clarification.


----------



## hakunangovi

incorrigible, if you want to know more about the structure of a foreskin, try www.cirp.org , and click on "Anatomy of the foreskin, Mechanics of intercourse". There are many interesting articles listed and accessible in the "references" section at the bottom.


----------



## AmyC

Quote:


Originally Posted by *incorrigible* 
. . . . So, I have a ? now....does the foreskin only retract enough to uncover the glans, or the shaft too? I thought in the condom discussion, one suggestion was to pull it back and get the condom under the foreskin but on the shaft...and I'm thinking I may have misunderstood.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Papai* 
It uncovers a little of the shaft that's underneath the head.


I thought it pulled further back, too. The photos were enlightening for me. So it's all one piece, covering the shaft as well as the glans, but it only retracts a little beyond the glans? Or is it that it will/can retract all the way, but functionally (during intercourse), it only moves to uncover the glans?

So when a man is circ'd (as a baby), what is left? There's skin further up on the shaft, and that is a remnant of the foreskin? There's no lip to get under, though, so it doesn't seem like a foreskin layer to me, just kind of looser skin that he can pull forward.


----------



## Revamp

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyC* 
I thought it pulled further back, too. The photos were enlightening for me. So it's all one piece, covering the shaft as well as the glans, but it only retracts a little beyond the glans?

The foreskin itself is indeed all in one piece but along the underside there is another part named the frenulum which serves as a connective band between glans and prepuce and is also exceptionally erogenous. That is often destroyed during a circumcision although remnants do remain in many cases.

Furthermore some people's do not cover the entire glans while some extend quite some way beyond it. That varies but the latter seem more common.

Quote:

Or is it that it will/can retract all the way, but functionally (during intercourse), it only moves to uncover the glans?
Uh...Kinda tricky to explain really, let me have a go:

Generally while the penis is flaccid you can pull back the foreskin to expose its entirity (all of the mucosal tissue and blood vessels etc) and it extends quite some way down the shaft since the rest of the skin is pushed down.

Generally this is not entirely possible while erect but that really varies a lot too dependent upon how long your foreskin is, how tight it is and how large your glans it. Normally it can't be stretched all the way back while erect and sort of curves behind the glans. Personally I can probably reveal all of it while hard but it's not immensely comfortable and is invariably grooved around.

Quote:

So when a man is circ'd (as a baby), what is left? There's skin further up on the shaft, and that is a remnant of the foreskin? There's no lip to get under, though, so it doesn't seem like a foreskin layer to me, just kind of looser skin that he can pull forward.
That really varies depending upon the circumcision. Normally quite a lot is taken but sometimes a lot of what is called the mucosal tissue is left.

It is important to bear in mind that foreskin is definetely not "Just a piece of skin"; although the outside is pretty much indistinguishable from the rest of the penile skin in anything other than its enhanced mobility the inner lining tissue similar to that found in your eyelid, mouth or nose and it serves a similar function, really. That is normally the most erogenous area of a man's body thus the more left the luckier the man is.

With the luckiest of all being the one who was left alone all together...


----------



## Papai

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyC* 
I thought it pulled further back, too. The photos were enlightening for me. So it's all one piece, covering the shaft as well as the glans, but it only retracts a little beyond the glans? Or is it that it will/can retract all the way, but functionally (during intercourse), it only moves to uncover the glans?

I'm confused by what you mean by "retract all the way."

The foreskin retracts, exposing the glans and sits behind the glans when retracted. If you want you manually retract a little further and see some shaft.

But if you're asking if the foreskin retracts all the way back to the pubic bone, no, it doesn't.


----------



## AmyC

I probably sound like a dunce! My experience is only with my partner, who is circumcised. But I guess I thought of the foreskin as covering the whole penis. Three of my nephews are intact, as well as half of the boys in my daughter's preschool class (I know from going along on their swim days), and they look like the classic "elephant trunk" or "anteater" with the continuous skin covering the whole penis and ending with a little shrivelly tip. It looks so perfect and normal to me, now. Anyway, being continuous skin, I guess I assumed that when they became retractable, that all would pull back exposing the complete penis from under the foreskin.

Looking at the photos, I see it's different.

Of course I knew the foreskin covered the glans, but I thought it extended back (as it does) and that you could retract it all the way back, revealing a pink and shiny penis--glans and shaft all covered & protected by a foreskin. I was imagining a good handful of skin that you'd somehow be holding back (like for cleaning, if not erect.)

And the whole idea of "just cutting off the tip or the end of the foreskin" sort of implies that there is more to the foreskin that is left alone, but in effect, it's basically removed if you circumcise at all because the functional part is gone. I know there are "loose circs," but from watching the process in those photos, it seems the whole point is the part that completely covers the glans, not anything else. If that's removed, the foreskin is essentially removed, even if there's technically more of it remaining further up the shaft.

Anyway, that's all. I just thought there was more skin pulling back further. And I haven't really thought about the particulars all that much, beyond simply wishing my husband were intact....


----------



## Revamp

You don't seem like a dunce, it really isn't your fault at all. The reason they do not peel back up the entire penis is because that would probably be problematic and more complex and their real protective function is mainly for the glans.

Quote:

And the whole idea of "just cutting off the tip or the end of the foreskin" sort of implies that there is more to the foreskin that is left alone, but in effect, it's basically removed if you circumcise at all because the functional part is gone.
You are not the only one to have thought that! When I first had circumcision explained to me (very poorly indeed both on an anatomical and theological level, by an R.S. teacher) I had presumed they just meant the protuberance and when I first saw a Jewish friend naked I literally did not believe my eyes!!


----------



## lemurmommies

Wow, thanks for posting this. It never occurred to DP and I to circumcise DS, because in our reasoning, we wouldn't circ a girl, so why would we circ a boy? But, as we are not intimately acquainted with penises in general







, this was really neat to see.


----------



## painfulquestioning

I'm glad the page has been helpful

Additionally, viewing the photos on the following two links also helps deepen and clarify ones understanding.

The three zones of penile skin shows just how extensive the foreskin is:
http://www.foreskin.org/3zones-c.htm

Contrast and compare pictures of cut and uncut penises:
http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/comparison.html


----------



## buckeyedoc

Thanks for the link. I have intact sons, but they are not retractable, so I also wondered "how far it goes back."

I can also now see how some female partners might not know a man is intact if they only see him erect, since the penis doesn't look that different unless you pay close attention to the little gathered foreskin behind the glans. That's not to say it doesn't function differently, of course. Not that I would know


----------



## fek&fuzz

Do you know how many times I saw the title to this thread and thought it said "gifts" as in presents? I kept wondering why someone would give a present of a moving photo of foreskin retraction. Was it some weird baby shower gift to try to convince someone of the beauty of the natural intact penis? I was baffled. Finally, my curiosity overcame me, and then it turns out they are "gifs" not "gifts".


----------



## Microsoap

I don't know if this is scientific here, but with my foreskin totally covered and me totally flaccid, I got a pen and drew a line on my foreskin where I could see/feel the ridge of my glans. With two fingers pulled my foreskin out away from myself and it's pretty far away from the tip of my glans (if you can picture it). But more importantly, I pulled my foreskin BACK as far as I could and I could get that line all the way to the base of my penis.

The intact penis is one long skin from base to tip. The foreskin glides back and forth from the tip of the glans all the way to the base of the penis. To say masturbation and/or intercourse only implies the foreskin gets pulled back to behind the rim, isn't accurate and doesn't give credit to the full benefit of its use.


----------



## angelcat

Quote:


Originally Posted by *buckeyedoc* 
Thanks for the link. I have intact sons, but they are not retractable, so I also wondered "how far it goes back."

I can also now see how some female partners might not know a man is intact if they only see him erect, since the penis doesn't look that different unless you pay close attention to the little gathered foreskin behind the glans. That's not to say it doesn't function differently, of course. Not that I would know









I was surprised at least once when I saw a guy un-erect, and discovered he was uncirced. I can't tell any difference either way, though, so I don't care. (as far as partners go, I wouldn't have son circed, if I had one.)


----------



## titania8

Quote:


Originally Posted by *fek&fuzz* 
Do you know how many times I saw the title to this thread and thought it said "gifts" as in presents? I kept wondering why someone would give a present of a moving photo of foreskin retraction. Was it some *weird baby shower gift* to try to convince someone of the beauty of the natural intact penis? I was baffled. Finally, my curiosity overcame me, and then it turns out they are "gifs" not "gifts".

















that is so funny!!







"....and look what we have here, from auntie helen...wait a minute....what the freak???"


----------



## kldliam

Quote:

Microsoap: I don't know if this is scientific here, but with my foreskin totally covered and me totally flaccid, I got a pen and drew a line on my foreskin where I could see/feel the ridge of my glans. With two fingers pulled my foreskin out away from myself and it's pretty far away from the tip of my glans (if you can picture it). But more importantly, I pulled my foreskin BACK as far as I could and I could get that line all the way to the base of my penis.

*The intact penis is one long skin from base to tip. The foreskin glides back and forth from the tip of the glans all the way to the base of the penis. To say masturbation and/or intercourse only implies the foreskin gets pulled back to behind the rim, isn't accurate and doesn't give credit to the full benefit of its use.*
Thanks for posting this. Gotta give credit where credit is due!


----------



## Papai

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Microsoap* 
I don't know if this is scientific here, but with my foreskin totally covered and me totally flaccid, I got a pen and drew a line on my foreskin where I could see/feel the ridge of my glans. With two fingers pulled my foreskin out away from myself and it's pretty far away from the tip of my glans (if you can picture it). But more importantly, I pulled my foreskin BACK as far as I could and I could get that line all the way to the base of my penis.

The intact penis is one long skin from base to tip. The foreskin glides back and forth from the tip of the glans all the way to the base of the penis. To say masturbation and/or intercourse only implies the foreskin gets pulled back to behind the rim, isn't accurate and doesn't give credit to the full benefit of its use.

Wait a minute, I'm intact as well. You're saying you can pull your foreskin all the back to the base of your penis? But only when flaccid, right? There's no way that's possible when erect, which is what I was talking about.

When erect, the foreskin retracts and sits behind the glans. It doesn't go all the way back to the base of the penis. Unless somebody has a magical inside/out penis.







:


----------



## baybee

Thanks for posting these links. Another great link to get an education about
the perfect functioning of the intact penis is the medical student teaching video at

(WMP, download)

http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcisi...TSC_256k_D.wmv


----------



## AmyC

Quote:


Originally Posted by *fek&fuzz* 
Do you know how many times I saw the title to this thread and thought it said "gifts" as in presents? I kept wondering why someone would give a present of a moving photo of foreskin retraction. Was it some weird baby shower gift to try to convince someone of the beauty of the natural intact penis? I was baffled. Finally, my curiosity overcame me, and then it turns out they are "gifs" not "gifts".










So you misread gifs for gifts, and interpreted "Five moving photo gifts" in the sense of _emotionally_ moving?







That's priceless. Perhaps they are moving enough to convince someone not to circumcise. But a sort of scary thought (photos of adult men) at a baby shower!


----------



## phatchristy

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Microsoap* 
I don't know if this is scientific here, but with my foreskin totally covered and me totally flaccid, I got a pen and drew a line on my foreskin where I could see/feel the ridge of my glans. With two fingers pulled my foreskin out away from myself and it's pretty far away from the tip of my glans (if you can picture it). But more importantly, I pulled my foreskin BACK as far as I could and I could get that line all the way to the base of my penis.

The intact penis is one long skin from base to tip. The foreskin glides back and forth from the tip of the glans all the way to the base of the penis. To say masturbation and/or intercourse only implies the foreskin gets pulled back to behind the rim, isn't accurate and doesn't give credit to the full benefit of its use.


Thanks for the explanation! Somewhere online I saw a picture of someone doing the same thing. They marked skin above the coronal ridge and the end of the foreskin (ridged band). I remember in that picture, the guy was fully retracted and when he pulled back all the way it too was at the base of the penis! It's just amazing, when you see that you *know* how much sensitive nerve dense skin was removed. It's pretty horrifying!







: I'm horrified by it, especially being married to a circ'd man (knowing exactly what is missing can be a difficult thing to deal with). DH here never wants to know...he wouldn't want to see this stuff, I think it would be too difficult.

Though, the other day he "happily" showed me that article about the lowering number of circs here. He is so proud (as am I) that we protected our son from MGM!


----------



## phatchristy

OK, someone sent me the link that I described in my last post. Here it is:

Warning: contains color photos of human male penis

http://www.foreskin.org/3zones-c.htm


----------



## AmyC

Thanks for the clarification about the retraction differences between flacid & erect. It makes sense that, when erect, the foreskin would function exactly in that way, rather than retracting all the way to the pelvis. Although I was assuming that it would push back further than that, depending on depth of thrust or something. That the gliding mechanism would somehow function in that way.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phatchristy* 
Thanks for the explanation! Somewhere online I saw a picture of someone doing the same thing. They marked skin above the coronal ridge and the end of the foreskin (ridged band). I remember in that picture, the guy was fully retracted and when he pulled back all the way it too was at the base of the penis! *It's just amazing, when you see that you *know* how much sensitive nerve dense skin was removed.* It's pretty horrifying!







: I'm horrified by it, especially being married to a circ'd man (knowing exactly what is missing can be a difficult thing to deal with). DH here never wants to know...he wouldn't want to see this stuff, I think it would be too difficult.


(emaphasis mine)

Here's what I don't get, though. Is that much sensitive nerve-dense skin really removed? Is circumcision removal of the foreskin or removal of part of the foreskin (exposing the glans.) To me, any is "too much," when it comes to function and sensitivity. I tend to think of my circ'd husband as being "without a foreskin," because I don't notice anything covering his penis, but the men in those photos look pretty much like him when erect & retracted. The shaft looks the same and it makes me wonder if that part of the foreskin is there while the important end is cut. And then with every circumcision, it is a matter of how much they cut. Then again, we are talking about infants here, and the amount of skin that is cut perhaps really does remove most or all of the foreskin (even what would cover the shaft)???

My husband may even have had a "loose circ" (I don't think he really looked "uncirc'd" as a baby the way loose circs often do, though, and he was cut in the 60's so I doubt it was stylistically a "loose circ") because he does have some skin that he can pull down over his penis/glans when flaccid (he has tried to show me what a foreskin might look like) but this is not skin that peels back from his penile shaft as a layer on top, so I don't know.

So given that an intact, flaccid male can retract all the way back to the base of his penis, is ALL of that skin gone in circumcised men? Is that extra "play" in the shaft skin (that might get pulled back that far as easily as pulled toward the glans, as in my husband's case) the remaining foreskin? (Even though it doesn't seem like a separate layer of skin that peels back to reveal anything underneath; it just seems like skin on the shaft.)

I just wondered at the statement that all of that skin was removed. We can see a flaccid penis being "fully retractable" but does that mean we can assume that ALL of that skin was removed in circumcision?


----------



## Tinker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *titania8* 







that is so funny!!







"....and look what we have here, from auntie helen...wait a minute....what the freak???"









Well I guess that would be better than a fruit cake!


----------



## Microsoap

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phatchristy* 
OK, someone sent me the link that I described in my last post. Here it is:

Warning: contains color photos of human male penis

http://www.foreskin.org/3zones-c.htm

Thanks, Christy. That's the series of pictures I was thinking about when I did it. I couldn't recall the exact URL.


----------



## Revamp

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyC* 
Here's what I don't get, though. Is that much sensitive nerve-dense skin really removed?

That depends on the doctor.

Quote:

Is circumcision removal of the foreskin or removal of part of the foreskin (exposing the glans.) To me, any is "too much," when it comes to function and sensitivity. I tend to think of my circ'd husband as being "without a foreskin," because I don't notice anything covering his penis, but the men in those photos look pretty much like him when erect & retracted. The shaft looks the same and it makes me wonder if that part of the foreskin is there while the important end is cut. And then with every circumcision, it is a matter of how much they cut. Then again, we are talking about infants here, and the amount of skin that is cut perhaps really does remove most or all of the foreskin (even what would cover the shaft)???

My husband may even have had a "loose circ" (I don't think he really looked "uncirc'd" as a baby the way loose circs often do, though, and he was cut in the 60's so I doubt it was stylistically a "loose circ") because he does have some skin that he can pull down over his penis/glans when flaccid (he has tried to show me what a foreskin might look like) but this is not skin that peels back from his penile shaft as a layer on top, so I don't know.
Regardless of how "Loose" his circumcision was your husband's certainly sounds "Low", as in not much was taken and the cut happened not to far up the penis.

Quote:

So given that an intact, flaccid male can retract all the way back to the base of his penis, is ALL of that skin gone in circumcised men?
That's more the skin being pushed out of the way really...

Quote:

Is that extra "play" in the shaft skin (that might get pulled back that far as easily as pulled toward the glans, as in my husband's case) the remaining foreskin? (Even though it doesn't seem like a separate layer of skin that peels back to reveal anything underneath; it just seems like skin on the shaft.)
Yes, that does sound like remnants to me. Obviously I can't see it or anything but from your description that is what it sounds like.

Quote:

I just wondered at the statement that all of that skin was removed. We can see a flaccid penis being "fully retractable" but does that mean we can assume that ALL of that skin was removed in circumcision?
It really often is, it sounds like your husband is one of the lucky few. In most cases you can find the scar _way_ up the shaft and a lot of muscosal tissues missing.


----------



## hakunangovi

AmyC, I sense a bit of a misunderstanding as to how you view the skin system of the penis. My apologies if I'm wrong. The outer skin starts at the base of the penis and goes to the tip of the foreskin where it then doubles back on itself (becoming mucosal tissue) as the inner foreskin and attaches just beneath the glans at the coronal sulcus. So when a foreskin is fully retracted, the doubled up bit is all stretched out, being pulled down the shaft, and exposing the glans. None of the "shaft" is ever uncovered/exposed because the inner foreskin is attached where the glans and shaft meet.
The foreskin is then all the outer skin extending from this point forward and all of the inner skin. Did I help or confuse you further ???


----------



## phatchristy

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyC* 

I just wondered at the statement that all of that skin was removed. We can see a flaccid penis being "fully retractable" but does that mean we can assume that ALL of that skin was removed in circumcision?

It honestly depends on how the doctor does it as to how much innerforeskin is left. Where is the scar? That is the big question. The closer to the base of the penis (groin) the scar is, the more innerforeskin remains. Hope that makes sense. I've seen some photos online where the scar was practicaly at the coronal ridge. In that case, pretty much all the innerforeskin was removed







: . More typically, a man may find that the scar is 1/2 to 1 inch below the coronal ridge, and so they have about 1/2 to 1 inch of innerforeskin remaining.

Which, if you are planning on venturing towards restoring part of what is lost, is the tissue which you WANT to concentrate on expanding







: . That is the mucosal tissue, with is nerve sensitive.

As for whether or not your DH has a looser circ...what they are when flaccid isn't as meaningful as when they are erect. Some men are "growers" as in, they may more than double in size when erect. So, they may seem to have a lot of wrinkling behind the shaft when flaccid, but be tight as a drum when erect. The question is...when erect, does the tube of skin easily and effortlessly move back and forth over the glans about halfway. I'd say then it's a loose circ.

THOUGH, I have seen men who have loose circs AND hardly any innerforeskin. It seems some doctors take care to make sure that they remove all the innerforeskin, but are pretty generous with leaving shaft skin (which sadly isn't that sensitive







)


----------



## AmyC

My head is spinning.

I am not even certain where his scar is. Isn't that wacky? I have wondered about it and have tried to find it, but I'm aware that he is less comfy with my scrutiny since I've become intense about this issue.

I don't think he has a loose circ. I don't think the tube of skin moves that much when erect. It moves, but I don't think there's a lot of play.

hakunagovi, I think you're right that I have some misconceptions. I was going to post more questions in response to your post, but I JUST got it. What you see on a baby or on a flaccid, intact male is the outer foreskin. The inner foreskin is the mucosal membrane and it is like the inside layer of the "tip," the part that pulls back to expose the glans.

It's one of the more sensitive parts of the penis. Some circumcised males have some of this tissue preserved, while it is completely missing on others.

I am having more trouble with the "where is the scar" question (besides that I don't know where _his_ scar is, precisely!) I'm having trouble visualizing why those scar locations would result in some inner foreskin left, that's all.

Is the scar basically where the cut ends of the foreskin fused to the penis?

What a whole, upsetting thing, regardless! Just trying to understand basic anatomical function makes you think "How could people do this, over and over?" Not only how could they cut, but how could they just trust a doctor to do it, and do it 'right.' And who even knows what's 'right,' anyway? It's just a look, (he looks circ'd or he doesn't look circ'd), no thought to function. It just makes it so hard to understand how it's _supposed_ to function. When it should be a matter of course. (If you're sexually active with a man, understanding penis/foreskin function shouldn't require a mental exercise and diagrams. You should be able to have an "in the flesh" consultation if you have questions.)


----------



## Tinker

AmyC I'm following this conversation closely. I'm just as difficult a time grasping all the intricacies of this. I consider myself an intelligent person but trying to understand the anatomy of the foreskin, and how it functions in all ways, well it just boggles my mind. My hub and I have been together 10 years and I just the other day realized he is loosely circ'ed. I too don't think he'd be real comfortable with me scrutinizing his penis for the circ scar. It's sad when you think about it, that we've been sold this bill of goods for so long that we know next to nothing of what should be basic penis anatomy. And we wonder why guys are so wrapped up in their penis's!







: ( that of course is not an insult to any guy anywhere, I'm just beginning to grasp the complexities of this)


----------



## l_olive

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hakunangovi* 
AmyC, I sense a bit of a misunderstanding as to how you view the skin system of the penis. My apologies if I'm wrong. The outer skin starts at the base of the penis and goes to the tip of the foreskin where it then doubles back on itself (becoming mucosal tissue) as the inner foreskin and attaches just beneath the glans at the coronal sulcus. So when a foreskin is fully retracted, the doubled up bit is all stretched out, being pulled down the shaft, and exposing the glans. None of the "shaft" is ever uncovered/exposed because the inner foreskin is attached where the glans and shaft meet.
The foreskin is then all the outer skin extending from this point forward and all of the inner skin. Did I help or confuse you further ???

This post is extremely helpful to me in figuring all this out. But where I'm lost is, where do they cut? The cut is not at the base of the penis, is it? I've actually never seen a newly-cut penis (thank the heavens), and I've never really understood this. When I look at my intact and unretractable son, all I see is foreskin right? Would every piece of skin that I'm looking at have been removed? Or is there a point somewhere in the middle where the foreskin is completely adhered (and stays adhered) to the penis -- and the butchers try to guess where this point will be when the baby is an adult?

I'm' not even sure my question makes sense. I've wanted to know all this for ages, but I'm not brave enough to look for the information on the internet. I wouldn't be able to handle the images that I would dig up on the way.

Thanks for this thread, by the way.

--Olive


----------



## AmyC

Quote:


Originally Posted by *l_olive* 
This post is extremely helpful to me in figuring all this out. But where I'm lost is, where do they cut? The cut is not at the base of the penis, is it? I've actually never seen a newly-cut penis (thank the heavens), and I've never really understood this. When I look at my intact and unretractable son, all I see is foreskin right? Would every piece of skin that I'm looking at have been removed? Or is there a point somewhere in the middle where the foreskin is completely adhered (and stays adhered) to the penis -- and the butchers try to guess where this point will be when the baby is an adult?

I'm' not even sure my question makes sense.

Your question makes perfect sense to me, and it's what I wanted to ask. Yes, you see one continuous length of skin (like a finger.) I thought that all was retractable, and underneath was a shaft & glans.

The post about the foreskin beginning at the base of the penis, continuing to the tip, then doubling back on itself (underneath) and attaching just beneath the glans helped me see. It's like one long (external) part, with a shorter segment that doubles back underneath. That segment is the retractable part. You might be able to pull it back further when flaccid, but it has that attached point behind the glans. (I'm still not sure where they cut, given that....)

I see now that every bit of skin you're looking at on your son's fused penis (all of which is external) would NOT have been cut in a circumcision. (Well, I'm assuming not at this point in time. Though of course, it's all up to a doctor. Is that what a "high and tight" circ actually IS? ALL the visible external skin of the penis being cut off???)

I, too, wonder where the cut would be (and why the scar is only on the underside, if that's even true), but I think the main thing that is cut is the part that doubles back. The part that is eventually retractable.

I hope you get an answer because I think your question is pretty clear.


----------



## emma_goldman

Wow. This vid is amazing. I learned a LOT! Now I am a better/more incensed intactivist.


----------



## phatchristy

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyC* 
Is that what a "high and tight" circ actually IS? ALL the visible external skin of the penis being cut off???)

I, too, wonder where the cut would be (and why the scar is only on the underside, if that's even true), but I think the main thing that is cut is the part that doubles back. The part that is eventually retractable.

I hope you get an answer because I think your question is pretty clear.

I'll try to answer some of the questions as best I know them. I think some may send you some links to photos to better understand. High and tight is exactly what circ'd men DON'T want to be. Sadly, it is what a lot of men in our generation are though







: . The scar is rather close to the glans (high) and there is little slack in the skin (tight). That removes the most errogenous tissue







: .

As for the scar, depending on what method is used some scars are darker and more obvious than others. Though, I've seen some photos where the main difference is color. The remnant innerforeskin, because it is mucosal tissue (like the inside of your mouth) is going to have a more pinkish/purplish hue than the shaft skin. That would be how you could tell how much innerforeskin is left as well.

I have to say, it can get emotionally overwhelming at times after finding out more and knowing what in fact your signifigant other is missing. It's sad that it seems that the majority of people in our generation tend to suffer from a tight circumcision with little innerforeskin or frenulum remaining. And, for many of us, we didn't *know* any of this because we grew up in a culture where we never had any experience with the normal male penis







: . I honestly didn't know that my husband was *missing anything* until when I researched it while pregnant. Yep, I was pretty horrified. I still am when I think about it.


----------



## AmyC

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phatchristy* 
High and tight is exactly what circ'd men DON'T want to be.

I knew that much, but had the sudden pang when reading Olive's question "Is everything I see cut off during circumcision?" I didn't think they cut at the base of the penis (thus, everything you see on a child would not be gone.) But then I thought "is THAT what high and tight is?!"

Okay, I am thinking that, relatively speaking, "low" relates to closer to the tip, and "high" relates to further up: close to the glans or past it?

If a boy "doesn't look circ'd" after the surgery, because there's a lot of skin left, he likely will look "more" circ'd as he grows, anyway?


----------



## Revamp

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyC* 
I knew that much, but had the sudden pang when reading Olive's question "Is everything I see cut off during circumcision?" I didn't think they cut at the base of the penis (thus, everything you see on a child would not be gone.) But then I thought "is THAT what high and tight is?!"

Yeah, quite horrible stuff huh?

It still baffles me that this is such common practice. Healers performing acts of such destruction, it's absurd...

Quote:

Okay, I am thinking that, relatively speaking, "low" relates to closer to the tip, and "high" relates to further up: close to the glans or past it?
Yes, "High" means further down the shaft and "Low" means that they stopped after the covering layer was removed {barely any stop before that point}. The reason that there is sometimes some overlap for circumcised men/boys/babies is that the foreskin often grows at a different rate or to a different rate to the rest of the penis.

Thus when in infancy it seemed the "Right" amount to remove but later on in life it grew further.

Of course things can go the other way and a doctor ends up taking what was fine at the time but later proves to be way too much and that is when the *real* fun starts: we're talking conditions like painful erections, near to utterly densitized genitals, "Buried" glanses and a charming condition named "Webbed penis" that looks twice as disgusting as it sounds.

This is what you get when you apply guess-work to the human body. Doctors are physicians, not prophets.

Quote:

If a boy "doesn't look circ'd" after the surgery, because there's a lot of skin left, he likely will look "more" circ'd as he grows, anyway?
That is the likelihood but not _per se_ a certainty. It almost always ends up that way but that is often not good enough for mothers, as we can determine from the trend of "Re-circumcisions".

Because sometimes one set of traumas just isn't enough...


----------



## phatchristy

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyC* 

If a boy "doesn't look circ'd" after the surgery, because there's a lot of skin left, he likely will look "more" circ'd as he grows, anyway?


Generally yes...in fact I know a few of us have sent a study saying just that to people who considered re-circing because some of their child's glans was still covered after circ'ing as an infant. As they grow and the penis grows generally more and more glans will be exposed.







: If someone has a link to that research they could post it, I know it's been posted to share with pro-circ people who think they have to "recirc" a baby who still has glans coverage







: so they can look circ'd.


----------



## MonicaS

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyC* 

I, too, wonder where the cut would be (and why the scar is only on the underside, if that's even true), but I think the main thing that is cut is the part that doubles back. The part that is eventually retractable.


I didn't see this question answered.

The scar goes around the cirumference of the penis shaft, not just under it. It may be just barely a different shade than the rest of the penis, it may be really dark, or it may only be visible b/c the mucosal tissue of the inner foreskin is a different shade than the reg skin of the outer foreskin. It may have an oblique shape where it is closer to the glans on one side and farther on the other, or it may go evenly around the shaft. If it wasn't a well done circ(I know no circ is "well done", but ykwim.) it may have a jagged or even stretched scar. It really varies w/ the individual.

Someone already posted this link, but judging by some replies that followed, I think many have skipped looking at it. It really visually compares intact vs circ'd. You can see various scars.
http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/comparison.html

It's really hard to discribe in type how the cut/scar is made, especially if you choose not look at sites that show circ pics. For illustrative purposes I'm going to be very general. Obviously, the location of the cut will vary w/ the person doing the cutting and the equipment they use. When the cut is made, they cut straight through the outer and inner foreskin at some arbitrary location depending on the preferences of the circer. This will leave a section of inner foreskin that will heal to the skin of the outer foreskin/shaft skin. The scar line is where those two surfaces heal. From the scarline to the glans is inner foreskin(mucosal membrane like in your mouth), and from the scarline to the pelvis is the shaft skin and what is left of the outer foreskin(one continuous section of skin). They have basically _editted_ some very important parts of the penial skin.


----------



## kldliam




----------



## littlemizflava

BUMP ....... new pics added


----------



## lynnloves2

This is interesting to me, I have never seen this done IRL. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Pandme

Is this thread stickied? It should be.

I feel pretty stupid....I have never seen an intact adult penis and I assumed it was "ugly" like everyone tells you. I did not circ my son and his penis looks so normal I found myself wondering at what age will it become "ugly". Now I see there is barely even a difference when erect, except the circed one looks uncomfortably tight and has those horrid scars.

I am so glad I did not circ my son. So, so glad. DH, while he is circed, does have a looser circ, thank goodness.


----------



## mean_jeannie

Wow, I'm impressed with the one that is of the man who has undergone restoration! Thanks for the link, it really broadened my understanding.


----------



## lramom

Wow! This is great education! My boys are intact, but I've never seen how a foreskin works on a man. I'm going through a divorce right now - I think I'll look for an intact man when I'm ready to start dating again, so I can see it up close


----------



## Lady Lilya

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Papai* 
Wait a minute, I'm intact as well. You're saying you can pull your foreskin all the back to the base of your penis? But only when flaccid, right? There's no way that's possible when erect, which is what I was talking about.

When erect, the foreskin retracts and sits behind the glans. It doesn't go all the way back to the base of the penis. Unless somebody has a magical inside/out penis.







:

I'm guessing it depends on the guy. I think my DH's can go almost all the way to the base, while erect. I'm going to have to experiment now to be sure.

----------

Amy C:

Maybe you want to identify how circed your DH was at this site:
Coverage Index


----------



## purposefulmother

I don't know why I never looked at these before. What a good bit of info.

My dh is intact and you can bet your bippy our sons are too







ESPECIALLY after seeing this, I think circ'ed penisi (peni??) look so forlorn, so incomplete.


----------



## Islay

It can be difficult to picture how a foreskin is made up and where it begins and ends - even for those who own one! Painfulquestioning's original post does an excellent job in grahically displaying the action of a foreskin, but it's clear from some subsequent posters that confusion still exists regarding the inner and outer foreskin and what part they play.

I've discovered a method of simulating a penis and its foreskin which will leave you in no doubt, I hope...

You will need:

1. One of those elastic supporting bandages that athletes use after a limb injury. Some First Aid kits come with one for domestic use. If you don't have this, find an old, long, stretchy sock or stocking or pair of tights. Just be sure whatever you use is elasticised. Why? Because this will be your foreskin - and foreskins stretch.

2. An arm; preferably your own, but any arm will do! This will will be your penis - oversized, but all the better for that!

Procedure:

(a) If you're using stocking, tights or a long sock you should cut it open at the closed end. This will ensure that whatever you use is now tubular, like the bandage (above).

(b) Next, if necessary, cut through again to the length of your extended hand and most of your lower arm.

(c) Bare your arm and clench your fist. Your arm is the shaft of the penis and your fist, the glans (head).

(d) Take the prepared tube and pull one end over your fist until it's snugly covering your wrist, leaving the rest dangling loosly. The stretched, snug end is where the inner foreskin, the mucous membrane, is firmly attached by the frenulum to the underside of the penis. (If we weren't using your arm, I'd suggest pinning or sewing a short, tough rubber band to simulate the frenulum. But, instead, just remember it's there!)

(e) Now insert the fingers of your free hand through the loose end of the tube, and stretch it open. Fold the sleeve back over the length of your fist and carefully up your arm. _The aim is to keep the changing folding point below your fist_. Obviously, if you can enlist some help, the process will much simpler.

You now have a simulated, uncircumcised penis in its flacid state. (Though it would be best if the bones in your lower arm were flacid, too!) The underside of the folded sleeve is the inner foreskin, full of all the sensory nerves; the upperside is the outer foreskin which extends along the length of the shaft to the pelvis.

But now your rigid lower arm is useful. You can mimic the effect of an erection by gripping the outer sleeve and stretching it back towards your elbow. Watch how your fist (glans) is slowly exposed, as the inner sleeve turns upside and the outer sleeve downside. If you use a silicone spray at this point on the upturned inner sleeve section, then release your grip on the outer sleeve, your 'foreskin' will slide back over the 'glans' again. This aproximates both the act of mastubation and that of sexual intercourse.

I have tried to explain every step clearly and relate them to a real penis. Because of this, it probably sounds more complicated than it really is. But do try it sometime - it works!









By the way, to the poster who queried the plural of 'penis', it's penes (last syllable _neez_) or penises. Penises is commonly used.









Christopher


----------



## feest

ok the little tendon thing that connects the bottom of the glands to the forskin(like the tendon thing under ur tongue that connects it to the bottom of ur mouth) whats that called and whats it for?


----------



## baybee

That's the frenulum (same word as the one under your tongue). It is very sensitive (erogenous zone) and keeps the prepuce tethered the same way the one under your tongue keeps your tongue from rolling back into your throat.


----------



## Microsoap

Quote:


Originally Posted by *baybee* 
That's the frenulum (same word as the one under your tongue). It is very sensitive (erogenous zone) and keeps the prepuce tethered the same way the one under your tongue keeps your tongue from rolling back into your throat.









Yeah. Think of it like a screen door spring hinge that keeps the foreskin from staying back all the time, thus protecting the glans.








: It's truly sad when I talk to guys online and have to explain to them what a frenulum is and ask them if they still have theirs or not. They know they were circumcised... but that's pretty much the extent of it. They don't know how much they have left.


----------



## feest

thanks i always wondered wa it was called....i like that thing-a-ma-bob


----------



## kldliam

bump


----------



## RachelGS

Bump!


----------



## beansavi

Quote:


Originally Posted by *titania8* 
ok, i thought it was 'animated' as in cartoon-y! not actual live penises!







still good info though. better actually. i've seen cartoon penises retract and glide, but not real ones. what a funny thing to talk about!!









Especially since the OP only has 9 posts and all of them are about this.







:


----------



## DMan

Right, so can someone help me out. The foreskin if the penis (when flaccid) is supposed to be able to be pulled back all the way to the base of your penis?! I can get it behind the head of my penis and behind the glands, but I havent actually tried pulling it all the way back to the base because I'm scred that my frenulum (banjo-string), rips or snaps or something. I'm 15 btw. Thanks a lot for any help you can give me.


----------



## USAmma

What a cool site!

My dh is intact so no surprises, but I'll bet that a lot of men don't know what a normal penis looks like. Hopefully a lot of men will see it and think twice about taking that away from their sons.


----------



## lovethyspirit

Ive seen an intact guy one time in all my years and these videos refresh my memory. I agree with the rest of the ladies and it would be nice to have my fiance intact as well, but I love him no matter what.







:


----------



## Lady Lilya

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DMan* 
Right, so can someone help me out. The foreskin if the penis (when flaccid) is supposed to be able to be pulled back all the way to the base of your penis?! I can get it behind the head of my penis and behind the glands, but I havent actually tried pulling it all the way back to the base because I'm scred that my frenulum (banjo-string), rips or snaps or something. I'm 15 btw. Thanks a lot for any help you can give me.

Go slow. Don't force it if it feels uncomfortable. I would think you would feel pain in the frenulum LONG before it could possibly snap.


----------



## Papai

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DMan* 
Right, so can someone help me out. The foreskin if the penis (when flaccid) is supposed to be able to be pulled back all the way to the base of your penis?! I can get it behind the head of my penis and behind the glands, but I havent actually tried pulling it all the way back to the base because I'm scred that my frenulum (banjo-string), rips or snaps or something. I'm 15 btw. Thanks a lot for any help you can give me.

NO!

You will injure yourself. The foreskin goes behind the glans and that's as far back it needs to go. You no reason to try retract all the way to the base of the penis.


----------



## Microsoap

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Papai* 
NO!

You will injure yourself. The foreskin goes behind the glans and that's as far back it needs to go. You no reason to try retract all the way to the base of the penis.

Perhaps I'm unique, but I can make my foreskin roll back into itself to half way down the shaft. Doing this makes the skin on my shaft roll into itself so I guess the outer foreskin covering my glans goes back and lies on top of the skin of my shaft. Best way I can describe it. I know everyone's different and foreskins can have different mobility and thickness and looseness factors. Mine is very mobile, thick and loose that I can do this. Since the only the owner fo the penis should see how far back the foreskin can go, it's based on what feels right without causing pain.


----------



## baybee

Sounds like penile yoga


----------



## Lady Lilya

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Microsoap* 
Perhaps I'm unique, but I can make my foreskin roll back into itself to half way down the shaft. Doing this makes the skin on my shaft roll into itself so I guess the outer foreskin covering my glans goes back and lies on top of the skin of my shaft. Best way I can describe it. I know everyone's different and foreskins can have different mobility and thickness and looseness factors. Mine is very mobile, thick and loose that I can do this. Since the only the owner fo the penis should see how far back the foreskin can go, it's based on what feels right without causing pain.

Sounds like DH's.


----------



## 4chunut1

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyC* 
...Here's what I don't get, though. Is that much sensitive nerve-dense skin really removed? Is circumcision removal of the foreskin or removal of part of the foreskin (exposing the glans.) To me, any is "too much," when it comes to function and sensitivity. I tend to think of my circ'd husband as being "without a foreskin," because I don't notice anything covering his penis, but the men in those photos look pretty much like him when erect & retracted. The shaft looks the same and it makes me wonder if that part of the foreskin is there while the important end is cut. And then with every circumcision, it is a matter of how much they cut. Then again, we are talking about infants here, and the amount of skin that is cut perhaps really does remove most or all of the foreskin (even what would cover the shaft)???

...So given that an intact, flaccid male can retract all the way back to the base of his penis, is ALL of that skin gone in circumcised men? Is that extra "play" in the shaft skin (that might get pulled back that far as easily as pulled toward the glans, as in my husband's case) the remaining foreskin? (Even though it doesn't seem like a separate layer of skin that peels back to reveal anything underneath; it just seems like skin on the shaft.)

I just wondered at the statement that all of that skin was removed. We can see a flaccid penis being "fully retractable" but does that mean we can assume that ALL of that skin was removed in circumcision?

Islay described in great detail how to visualize an uncircumcised penis with its different parts. This is a more basic representation, but may be easier to visualize...

Take a long-sleeved blouse or man's shirt and insert your arm in a sleeve. Don't put the garment on, just insert your arm. Button the cuff at your wrist. Make a fist and then with your other hand grasp the fabric at your forearm and slide it forward over your fist and beyond.

You now have an approximation of an uncircumcised penis. Your fist is the glans, your arm the shaft, and the fabric the skin. The "doubled thickness" of fabric from your wrist where the fabric is buttoned to beyond your fist is the foreskin. The layer of fabric next to your fist would be the inner foreskin or mucosal tissue.

The doubled part is what is removed in circumcision, at least with infants. All of the mucosal tissue is removed, as well as an equal amount of shaft skin covering the glans.

In adults, various methods of circumcision are employed. There is one procedure that preserves most of the shaft skin. The tip of the foreskin is stretched beyond the glans and excised. This allows separation of the inner and outer foreskin. The outer foreskin is retracted or slid back behind the glans, and the inner foreskin or mucosal tissue is excised at the sulcus. Then the outer foreskin is stitched to the penis at that point. This provides for more stretching during an erection and greater shaft skin mobility, but all of the most sensitive mucosal tissue is lost.


----------



## phatchristy

Lots of great info in this thread...should be shared daily!


----------



## Demeter_shima

Thank you SO much for this!
I had never seen an intact penis before this video and picture series...and I admit I was nervous. I am SO glad that I have now and honestly i'm more annoyed about circ than ever! I have a dear friend who practacly yelled at me how grose a penis loks "uncirced" and how horrible it is if I don't cut my baby. Um...first of all...it's not grose at all...in fact...now (don't tell my hubby) circed penises look nake to me.
They are all vulnerable and exposed...not something I'd think a man would want to call his "member". In terms of function it makes total sense to me now! I had no idea how form fitted it was...it barely is noticable except at the end...and that retracts when "in use"








I don't get the problem! Why do people think that needs to be removed? If it functions as a protector of a gland...there is NO reason to cut it.
I guess these are the people who think it's okay to wax off all their genital hair for vanity...even though it serves a protective purpose.
The whole thing just makes me nauseus.







:


----------



## kldliam

bump


----------



## jessjgh1

bump


----------



## kldliam

bump


----------



## kldliam

bump


----------



## Siana

I hate how even if a penis is restored, it'll never be the same in most ways as it originally was/could've been







(i.e. the skin is thick, as opposed to the eye-lid-type skin that natural foreskins are like). My DP had RIC done to him, and reading threads in this forum seriously makes me depressed.

Also, I didn't know till yesterday that the vast majority of circ. males need lube to masturbate. I just hadn't given it much thought before. As an intact female, I just take for granted that I have no reliance on anything if I wanted to masturbate. I feel sad for all circ. males, but it's very important to have saved them from masturbatory insanity you know







: (well that was the reasoning behind the popularization of routine circ. several generations ago in North America)


----------



## kldliam

bump


----------



## kldliam

Talk about bells and whistles!


----------



## HappyFox05

That was fascinating, thank you for posting it! I'm going to send some of those links to a friend at work who's trying to convince her husband that circumcision is more than just "removing a skin tag".


----------



## kldliam

After seeing how an _anatomically correct_ penis works, I'd be absolutely FURIOUS (if i were a "revised" man) to learn that my penis did not function like this. It looks like there would be so much more pleasure with that "little flap of skin".


----------



## kldliam

bump


----------



## perspective

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tinker* 
"fully loaded" kinda sounds like a spiffy new car with all the bells and whistles. hehehe.

The only thing I could imagine that would even come close, is if WE had to endure FGM and had no clitoris. Being as how I DO have one the thought of not having one is kind of like "What's the point?" So yeah I get it. I do feel bad for the men.

Well its not exactly the same as removing the clitoris. Biologically when you match up parts, its more like the clitoral hood, which I imagine is still a very sensitive area.

Emotionally, I think the foreskin can be compared to the inner and outer lips. Just like the foreskin, I imagine the removal would leave a woman feeling exposed.

I have seen an intact penis before. But watching that video makes me wish I could have one two. Whats weird with me, is I was not born with a complete foreskin, so I would have had to have some kind of reconstruction to get something like a normal one. I cant even imagine how angry I would be if I was born with a perfect foreskin, but then it was taken away because concerns of my parents that they would no longer even care about after a year or so.


----------



## foreskin friendly

painfulquestioning...

you are just wonderful...

first, for getting me onboard with this awesome bunch, here at CAC,

and now for an EXCELLENT resource!


----------



## basset

Wow!!!! That was totally amazing. I showed my dh and now he feels cheated (he's circed) and he is glad our ds kept his parts. I had to show my dh that the pigmented skin just below his glans is the actual scar from circ. It's a shame that he (dh) was never even given a choice.....


----------



## thixle

Quote:


Originally Posted by *perspective* 
Well its not exactly the same as removing the clitoris. Biologically when you match up parts, its more like the clitoral hood, which I imagine is still a very sensitive area.

As close to exact analogy as I can get--
I't more like removing the clitoral hood (starting at the "part line" of the pubic hair), the inner lips, and approximately 1" of the interior wall of the vagina. It really IS that much, when you are talking about a "high & tight" or "50-50" 1970s and 80s male circ.

Of course, depending on the amount of skin available and the amount removed, it would vary.

Thanks for this link OP!


----------



## kldliam

Quote:

bassett Wow!!!! That was totally amazing. I showed my dh and now he feels cheated (he's circed) and he is glad our ds kept his parts.
yea, i really don't know how any man can look at this footage of the super pleasurable "gliding mechanism" and NOT feel seriously cheated.

OR for that matter, how any mom who circ'd her child, can look at this video and see how badly she's cheated her son.


----------



## painfulquestioning

I am thrilled that this particular intactivist project has helped to fill a deficit in knowledge for those who have been wrongly denied access to their own or their partner's entire penis.

On the site, I added pages for a Comprehensive Link Collection:
www.geocities.com/painfulquestioning/links

Videos(27 of the most useful for intactivism -- if anyone wants to save any of them to their own computer, just ask and I'll email them to you):
www.geocities.com/painfulquestioning/videos

And Personal Stories/Quotes:
www.geocities.com/painfulquestioning/stories


----------



## trmpetplaya

How excellent that these are here as a resource! I haven't clicked the links (partially because dh is intact so I don't feel the need to), but it's wonderful to read the responses







If a picture is worth 1,000 words then how many more words are moving pictures worth







Especially in this case!

love and peace.


----------



## kldliam

bump


----------



## 3pink1blue

Bump


----------



## kldliam

bumpity bump bump bump!


----------

