# Why WOULDN'T a man want to restore???



## salt_phoenix (May 10, 2007)

I've wondered about this often, and dh doesn't seem to have any better response than, "cuz what's done is done, and it would seem stupid to walk around with tape on my penis."

I didn't have to convince him about circ being a bad idea if we have a son.
He often backs me up with facts about health and sensitivity when debating with pro-circ friends.
He seems to be quite open and educated, however doesn't seem to lament lacking his own.
I have often mentioned that if I were a cut man, I would DEFINITELY be P.O.'d and would restore.

I personally LIKE the looks and feel of an uncut penis, I KNOW it would make MY sex life better (not be so brutal on me) and I know he would be a lot more sensitive. (he knows it too)

What exactly stops him? Laziness? Embarrassment?
Any ideas on encouraging restoration in an otherwise educated man? He won't give me what I think of as a "good" excuse... just that "it's dumb".


----------



## stik (Dec 3, 2003)

It's his penis. It's been that way for the vast majority of his life and the entirety of his adult sexual experience. Restoring is a big project, and an even bigger project if he's basically satisfied with how he looks and feels.

Maybe there's a way the two of you could improve your sex life without changing either of your bodies.


----------



## Papai (Apr 9, 2007)

I certainly understand why a cut man might not want to restore. It's a huge endeavor for something that can never be fully restored.

I don't knock those who do restore, in fact I applaud their determination and courage. But I also understand why a cut man would just want to leave it alone.


----------



## SammyJr (Aug 21, 2006)

I'm a cut man and can't imagine not restoring. Its made everything about sex so much better. Sure, its not perfect and its not the real thing, but its a huge improvement.

I guess I could understand if a guy is really loosely cut and doesn't see the problems that 1970s "cut off the entire foreskin + 10%" guys see, but still, the effect of having the glans coverage is well worth it.


----------



## pdx.mothernurture (May 27, 2004)

I know for my own husband, he's pretty happy with sex and he has concerns about the time commitment, possible discomfort, the possible embarrassment if it's worn during the day, what if he doesn't like it or it doesn't look natural, etc. Ultimately he has to be convinced that the benefits outweigh the risks. Every circumcision causes damage but the extend of the circumcision and amount of damage varies...so I think the motivation to research/undertake restoration is high for some and low for others.

Just as I believe that no healthy healthy should be circed against his will, I also believe that no circumcised man should be pressured into restoration; his body, his choice.

Jen


----------



## Daisyuk (May 15, 2005)

I guess it's a "his body, his choice" thing. He's been messed about with, he's used to what he's got, he can't (or doesn't want to) see anything wrong with his own penis, why go to all that effort to change something he's used to and ok with? The fact that things could be better don't worry some people, especially if you're one of the lucky ones that don't really have any sexual problems at the moment.

I'm not a man, but I can imagine thinking something along those lines.


----------



## s_kristina (Aug 9, 2004)

He also might not be ready to fully admit what was taken from him. It's a hard thing to wrap your mind around for anyone. For a man that had it done as an infant it's got to be really, really rough. My dh knows all the reasons not to circ and will point them out. He even thinks that the idea is insane, but to admit that there could be more for him or something could be wrong is miles beyond that thought. While I think it would be nice it's not something I would ever even bring up with him beyond commenting that some men do it. It's just too raw of a subject even decades after the original damage was done.


----------



## ThomasL (Sep 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *salt_phoenix* 
I've wondered about this often, and dh doesn't seem to have any better response than, "cuz what's done is done, and it would seem stupid to walk around with tape on my penis."

I didn't have to convince him about circ being a bad idea if we have a son.
He often backs me up with facts about health and sensitivity when debating with pro-circ friends.
He seems to be quite open and educated, however doesn't seem to lament lacking his own.
I have often mentioned that if I were a cut man, I would DEFINITELY be P.O.'d and would restore.

I personally LIKE the looks and feel of an uncut penis, I KNOW it would make MY sex life better (not be so brutal on me) and I know he would be a lot more sensitive. (he knows it too)

What exactly stops him? Laziness? Embarrassment?
Any ideas on encouraging restoration in an otherwise educated man? He won't give me what I think of as a "good" excuse... just that "it's dumb".


I am a circed male. I myself have no desire to restore because like a previous poster said it is a big project and I guess I am used to it this way though I wonder what it would have been like not being cut at all and if I had a son he would have been intact. I would never marry a girl who was obcessed with circing.

As for sexual sensativity there are several areas of my body that I find more sensative than the glans. I do not know if it is the brain making up for the lost tissue by creating an alternate area.


----------



## Greg B (Mar 18, 2006)

I have found that it is impossible to explain to a guy that restoration could possibly improve his sex life. I myself was not convinced that it would improve anything in a signficant way. And i could not see that getting to climax was slowly becoming harder and harder. Its like watching a child grow, you do not see the change, but out of town relatives are amazed.

But now that i am partially restored, I have found that it really is an amazing difference. And increased sensitivity of the glans is small potatoes. The big difference is from the extra skin moving. Now way to explain it, but that is what makes all the difference! To both me and my wife.

So, you can lead a horse to water...

It is a long tedious and not so easy to figure out process. Takes committment and perserverance. If sex is great right now, why bother? Especially in a society like ours. So let him go at his speed. If it happens, let it be because he is engaged and wants to do it for himself. If he never reaches that point, shrug.

If he or anyone else wants to send me a pm, to discuss it more, feel free.

Regards


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *stik* 
It's his penis. It's been that way for the vast majority of his life and the entirety of his adult sexual experience. Restoring is a big project, and an even bigger project if he's basically satisfied with how he looks and feels.









:


----------



## smeisnotapirate (Aug 24, 2007)

DH read this and said "too lazy," chuckled, and walked out.


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

It's a huge PITA undertaking. I can easily understand why a guy wouldn't want to.

-Angela


----------



## Arwyn (Sep 9, 2004)

Too much work; the actual act can be uncomfortable; sex doesn't suck without a foreskin even if it would be better with; there's value to accepting yourself just the way you are even if that's not "perfect".

Who would want to hear from their partner that they're not good enough, especially when it's from something that was done TO them that they didn't have any control over? "Hey, Suzy, I know your parents fed you junk and gave you a complex about exercise and food that you've spent a lifetime coping with, but I just don't want to have sex with you until you lose 50 pounds. Really, it'd be better for both of us." That may not be what you intend to say, but might be how you're heard.

Love your partner. Love that he's an intactivist. Let him have some control over his body, control that he was denied as an infant.

If you really want it done, let him know about the idea, that you'd like to help, and that you'll support him in whatever he choses, even if it's to not restore. Then actually support him and accept him, whatever his choice is.

My 2c.


----------



## phatchristy (Jul 6, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Greg B* 
I have found that it is impossible to explain to a guy that restoration could possibly improve his sex life. I myself was not convinced that it would improve anything in a signficant way. And i could not see that getting to climax was slowly becoming harder and harder. Its like watching a child grow, you do not see the change, but out of town relatives are amazed.

But now that i am partially restored, I have found that it really is an amazing difference. And increased sensitivity of the glans is small potatoes. The big difference is from the extra skin moving. Now way to explain it, but that is what makes all the difference! To both me and my wife.

So, you can lead a horse to water...

I think that hit the nail on the head, and DH here completely doubted it would make a differernce as well. He started just to "please me"







and because he said it made sense to him that it would eliminate the need for extra lube, etc.

So, he started not expecting anything really and was really surprised!


----------



## Ecstatic (Aug 13, 2007)

I had never known, until this board, that foreskin restoration existed. It does seem like a fairly intense undertaking. So, I could see why men would not be eager to do it. Especially since they've lived with their circumcised penis for all of their lives. Plus, I've found that men tend to be a little "funny" when it comes to messing with that area.

I also had never heard of the female sexual difficulties because of it until this board. So, I asked my partner about it - he's circumcised, but thinks it's barbaric and wouldn't do it to his (potential) son.

My partner's response was that he'd try it only if we actually had problems with the way it is now. And had exhausted every other option, and had proven that more foreskin would solve them.







So, I guess that would be a "no" from him.

He says he's lived with it like this since day 1, and doesn't see the need to change it. He's happy with it. He said it's brought him a lot of pleasure throughout all these years, so he really has no complaints.

Plus, he's a cyclist. Bikes 50 - 70 miles a day. Does races ... he doesn't want anything to interfere with that.

I'm trying to place myself in a man's shoes ... like if I had a penis, would I go through restoration? I don't know, honestly. It would depend on my partner, probably, than on anything else.


----------



## Greeneyes0506 (Aug 31, 2006)

.


----------



## rambunctiouscurls (Oct 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arwyn* 
Too much work; the actual act can be uncomfortable; sex doesn't suck without a foreskin even if it would be better with; there's value to accepting yourself just the way you are even if that's not "perfect".

Who would want to hear from their partner that they're not good enough, especially when it's from something that was done TO them that they didn't have any control over? "Hey, Suzy, I know your parents fed you junk and gave you a complex about exercise and food that you've spent a lifetime coping with, but I just don't want to have sex with you until you lose 50 pounds. Really, it'd be better for both of us." That may not be what you intend to say, but might be how you're heard.

Love your partner. Love that he's an intactivist. Let him have some control over his body, control that he was denied as an infant.

If you really want it done, let him know about the idea, that you'd like to help, and that you'll support him in whatever he choses, even if it's to not restore. Then actually support him and accept him, whatever his choice is.

My 2c.









:


----------



## DJay (Sep 10, 2006)

I restored because I felt so naked with my glans exposed. I also wanted to look like my father. It was something few of my associates had (they were all circumcised).

During restoration I had to deal with issues like -- taking longer in the rest room to 'untape and re-tape'. Going to the gym -- uh, what would the guys say? Or do I have to untape prior to gym and then re-tape later. etc. But it was worth it to me.

D


----------



## orangebird (Jun 30, 2002)

I don't know









I am married to a circumcised man. He is anti circ and we have left our sons intact.

I have had intact and cut partners and there is no doubt that intact feels better. Circed feels like being violated by a blunt object.

DP has told me he is willing to restore. I showed him a bunch of sites with tips, instructions, testimonies, things to buy, etc. He still has never taken that first step.

He knows how much I coil from every sexual advance, and he knows why. It just hurts. But he still, knowing all this, the fact I would be more likely to want to have sex, he still hasn't started.







I have no idea


----------



## MCKH (Jun 26, 2006)

I am married to a happily circumsized man who is also onboard with us not circumsizing our baby, due next month (we know it's a boy.) I think he would see a restoration as unnecessary, painful and risky as a circumcision, and thus would not choose the former for himself or the latter for our child.


----------



## Stinkerbell (Aug 11, 2005)

I guess the suggestion that he might WANT to restore is more bizarre, to me. (I do not mean that offensively...







)

having another surgical procedure to "undo" an unauthorized surgical procedure is defeating it's own purpose, right?? I'm sure the prospect of anyone coming near his genitals with sharp instruments and the promise of a recovery period holds very little appeal.


----------



## jenP (Aug 22, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Greg B* 
Its like watching a child grow, you do not see the change, but out of town relatives are amazed.

Sorry, I know you're just comparing the progress with restoring to the changes in growing children, but I couldn't help picturing showing your restoration progress to the out of town relatives







"Wow, look at that glans coverage! That's really changed since last summer!"

Sorry. juvenile humor.

on topic, anyway, my husband doesn't want to go around with contraptions taped to his dick for months on end. Thinks it was barbaric and stupid that he was cut as a baby, but what's done is done and that's what he's got. Kind of like not all women who have a mastectomy have reconstructive surgery to restore the breast.

Jen


----------



## Arwyn (Sep 9, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Stinkerbell* 
I guess the suggestion that he might WANT to restore is more bizarre, to me. (I do not mean that offensively...







)

having another surgical procedure to "undo" an unauthorized surgical procedure is defeating it's own purpose, right?? I'm sure the prospect of anyone coming near his genitals with sharp instruments and the promise of a recovery period holds very little appeal.

Just FYI, restoration can be a totally DIY deal, no sharp instruments or surgeries required.









I like the mastectomy comparison. Thanks for that!


----------



## Greg B (Mar 18, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Stinkerbell* 
I guess the suggestion that he might WANT to restore is more bizarre, to me. (I do not mean that offensively...







)

having another surgical procedure to "undo" an unauthorized surgical procedure is defeating it's own purpose, right?? I'm sure the prospect of anyone coming near his genitals with sharp instruments and the promise of a recovery period holds very little appeal.

Surgery is NOT an effective way to resore.

Restoration is by tensioning the skin to promote cell diviison and growth. It can be a simple as pulling on your foreskin. But a LOT of skin was taken away form us, so it takes a long time to grow it back. Even longer if you only do it occassionally.

If your happy as you are, stay that way. When i found out about restoration, something inside compelled me to do it. That should be the reason for restoring. It takes patience and committment. Hard to do if you are ambivalent about it.

Regards


----------



## MeepyCat (Oct 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *orangebird* 
I don't know









I am married to a circumcised man. He is anti circ and we have left our sons intact.

I have had intact and cut partners and there is no doubt that intact feels better. Circed feels like being violated by a blunt object.

DP has told me he is willing to restore. I showed him a bunch of sites with tips, instructions, testimonies, things to buy, etc. He still has never taken that first step.

He knows how much I coil from every sexual advance, and he knows why. It just hurts. But he still, knowing all this, the fact I would be more likely to want to have sex, he still hasn't started.







I have no idea









Orangebird, if sex with your husband feels like a violation to you, I feel like more foreskin might not solve it. Feeling violated is just such a huge emotional thing that if seems odd to me that you attribute it entirely to the circumcision, and not to other factors. It seems to me that that particular feeling, and the responses you describe to sexual advances, might leave both you and your partner in paralyzing amounts of emotional pain. If that's really how you feel about sex with your partner, I feel like both of you need help, and foreskin restoration isn't gonna do the job all by itself.


----------



## Daisyuk (May 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MeepyCat* 
Orangebird, if sex with your husband feels like a violation to you, I feel like more foreskin might not solve it. Feeling violated is just such a huge emotional thing that if seems odd to me that you attribute it entirely to the circumcision, and not to other factors. It seems to me that that particular feeling, and the responses you describe to sexual advances, might leave both you and your partner in paralyzing amounts of emotional pain. If that's really how you feel about sex with your partner, I feel like both of you need help, and foreskin restoration isn't gonna do the job all by itself.

You don't understand. If every time you have sex you end up in pain, you DO recoil at the idea, and if he goes ahead anyway (and you give in because, you know, you love him and feel guilty at the idea of rejecting him) you DO feel violated, because he is causing you PAIN and doesn't seem to care as long as his needs are fulfilled. This is very unlikely to be happening if he wasn't circumcised and could make love the way he is supposed to, the pain causes the recoiling, it's a learned reaction.

And yes, the emotional pain is huge. THANK YOU MIL.







:


----------



## Ecstatic (Aug 13, 2007)

I'm sorry, I don't want to step one anyone's toes ... but, I feel that a partner who goes ahead ANYWAY, knowing that you're in pain ... is a problem in and of itself. Sex is mutual, and going ahead while a partner is in pain is wrong on so many levels. I would feel violated then too. That would also be the last time I had sex with my partner. Seriously. It would also be, quite possibly, the end of our relationship if he continued to not understand that 1. sex is mutual, 2. together, we need to work out a way of having sex without pain. I don't necessarily think restoration is the only option to number 2. I'm sure it can be. But, I'm also sure there are others. While, yes, they make take more work, consideration, and a re-learning of certain behaviours for the man ... but, honestly, I would hope that would be preferable to inflicting pain one one's partner.

I'm really sorry anyone has to go through something like that. It's just not right.


----------



## MeepyCat (Oct 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daisyuk* 
You don't understand. If every time you have sex you end up in pain, you DO recoil at the idea, and if he goes ahead anyway (and you give in because, you know, you love him and feel guilty at the idea of rejecting him) you DO feel violated, because he is causing you PAIN and doesn't seem to care as long as his needs are fulfilled. This is very unlikely to be happening if he wasn't circumcised and could make love the way he is supposed to, the pain causes the recoiling, it's a learned reaction.

And yes, the emotional pain is huge. THANK YOU MIL.







:









It makes _perfect_ sense to me that, if sex always resulted in pain for you, you would recoil at the idea. I understand that.

But if my partner was causing me pain and didn't seem to care, so long as his sexual needs were met, I don't understand why I would look at the situation and determine that foreskin restoration was the solution. That's a huge relationship problem you've described there. Gigantic. Awesomely painful. Way more complicated than the geography of his penis.

There is no one way that guys are supposed to make love, because all women are different. If what he's doing doesn't work for you, and you can't convince him to try to alter his technique so that sex feels better for you, then foreskin restoration sounds to me like it's going to take him from a lousy lover with a circumcised penis to a lousy lover with restored foreskin.

Foreskin makes sex different, but it sure doesn't guarantee that sex will be good. Some uncut guys are delightful. Some aren't. There's a lot of variation in the human species, and sex is (in my experience) not about the genitalia, but about the people who have them.


----------



## Daisyuk (May 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MeepyCat* 
It makes _perfect_ sense to me that, if sex always resulted in pain for you, you would recoil at the idea. I understand that.

But if my partner was causing me pain and didn't seem to care, so long as his sexual needs were met, I don't understand why I would look at the situation and determine that foreskin restoration was the solution. That's a huge relationship problem you've described there. Gigantic. Awesomely painful. Way more complicated than the geography of his penis.

There is no one way that guys are supposed to make love, because all women are different. If what he's doing doesn't work for you, and you can't convince him to try to alter his technique so that sex feels better for you, then foreskin restoration sounds to me like it's going to take him from a lousy lover with a circumcised penis to a lousy lover with restored foreskin.

Foreskin makes sex different, but it sure doesn't guarantee that sex will be good. Some uncut guys are delightful. Some aren't. There's a lot of variation in the human species, and sex is (in my experience) not about the genitalia, but about the people who have them.

No, you've completely missed the point again. Sex with circumcised men _is_ different than with intact men, there is tremendous friction with a circ'd man (and sometimes with an intact man with a condom on, as that also ruins the gliding action of the foreskin), that just isn't there with an intact man. It doesn't seem to be possible for circ'd men to "change their technique" if they need to pound hard to get anywhere. It's just not going to happen, because they don't have the equipment necessary to do it i.e. a sensitive glans covered by a foreskin which also acts as a roller bearing to prevent friction.

If your sex life is great with a circ'd penis, that's fine - be interesting to see if you say the same thing in 30 years time when the effects are greater on both of you.

Of course not all intact men are going to be great lovers, but they've got all their equipment and a bad intact lover isn't going to be anywhere near as painful as a bad circ'd one.

There's a reason why there are so many women in the US with "female sexual dysfunction", and most of it is not their fault at all. It's about time that someone did a proper research project on it - but of course that would mean stopping the cutting, and there's too much money in that, so it won't happen,


----------



## transformed (Jan 26, 2007)

they like to think their penises are perfect.







It's kind of like kicking a man in the balls to tell him he should restore.


----------



## transformed (Jan 26, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daisyuk* 
No, you've completely missed the point again. Sex with circumcised men _is_ different than with intact men, *there is tremendous friction with a circ'd man* ,

So get some lube.


----------



## Mommiska (Jan 3, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *transformed* 
So get some lube.

That isn't going to solve all problems.

If you have a circed guy who needs lots and lots of hard pounding away in order to climax, you are going to have to (I would imagine) use loads and loads of lube - and if he continues to take a long time, you are going to need to re-apply.

And that's going to really kill the mood, right? So this poor guy - who, again, needs lots of hard pounding in order to climax, has to start over again...

Just buying (and using) lots and lots and lots of lube is NOT going to solve the problem for some couples. It might for some, but it won't for all.


----------



## transformed (Jan 26, 2007)

It pretty much solves the problems. Applying lube doesnt kill the mood. Looking at a man as if he is deformed kills the mood.


----------



## Daisyuk (May 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *transformed* 
It pretty much solves the problems. Applying lube doesnt kill the mood. Looking at a man as if he is deformed kills the mood.

Actually, getting pounded until you are sore, lube or not, and knowing that the after effects are going to last for days are pretty much the mood killer. So much so that the "mood" doesn't happen and gets avoided at all costs.

Sorry, like it or not, circumcision _is_ the cause of a LOT of difficulties, and it's this refusal to recognise it that allows mothers to keep on cutting. Some feelings are going to have to get hurt somewhere along the line, because people HAVE to know and recognise that cutting up a man's genitals is NOT going to do anything to better his or his partner's sex life.

That's just the way it is.


----------



## Laggie (Nov 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommiska* 
That isn't going to solve all problems.

If you have a circed guy who needs lots and lots of hard pounding away in order to climax, you are going to have to (I would imagine) use loads and loads of lube - and if he continues to take a long time, you are going to need to re-apply.

And that's going to really kill the mood, right? So this poor guy - who, again, needs lots of hard pounding in order to climax, has to start over again...

Wow, who knew I was killing the mood by applying lube? DH sure doesn't.







The clitoris also is not self-lubricating and needs lube applied regularly - does that kill the mood too? I hope not, because we've been enjoying it all this time









I don't mean to make light of this issue - I do agree that intact is generally more comfortable - but I think your reasons why using lube won't work are a bit silly. Of course, I'm a bit of a lube junkie, no matter the status of my partner's foreskin, so I guess I'm biased.

Silicone lubes last a loooong time, btw. I hate them, but some people swear by them.


----------



## transformed (Jan 26, 2007)

I just feel bad for the men. I mean, how would you feel if someone told you there was something wrong with your anatomy? How sexy would you feel?

Sheesh....take their feelings into consideration.

I could never circ a baby because I know what I know, but the issue of my dh restoring is completley his issue.

If you are having sexual issues, it is possible that they are caused by other reasons as well.


----------



## Ecstatic (Aug 13, 2007)

Ok, I understand there are women out there who are affected by male circumcision and how lube doesn't solve the whole problem.

But, frankly, I still think there IS something wrong if a man is having sex with his wife/partner and not really caring that he's hurting her. Or going through it anyway, even though he knows she's in pain. For me, that is unacceptable. It's also unacceptable/unthinkable for my partner. I can't imagine that such a thing is healthy or good for a marriage/partnership.

I think a man CAN re-learn how to orgasm through more gentle means. Yes, it takes time and effort and open communication. And, not only does it take time and effort when it comes to sex, but it also takes committment and the same approach when it comes to him masturbating. It also takes a shift in thinking, i.e. not "my pleasure is most important" but "my pleasure comes from her pleasure, I do not want my orgasm at the expense of her pain, I want to make sex mutual."

If a man cares so much about his pleasure that he'll go for the orgasm despite hurting his partner, despite the fact that she feels violated each time they have intercourse, that's really scary to me. I mean, really scary. It's the attitude that is scary to me, not the reason for the pain. And THAT kind of attitude will remain regardless of the state of foreskin.

I feel VERY strongly that sex is mutual, and that it is a physical expression of what we feel for our partners. Pain is not something that should ever have a place in such an act. Unless, of course, it's kinky play people enjoy.

I think that the healthy thing would be to get together with one's partner and figure it out. What will make it better? How? And then start solving it. Whatever it takes. Because going through one's marriage like this ... just sounds awful. I just don't think anyone should experience this. It's not right.


----------



## Daisyuk (May 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ecstatic* 

I think a man CAN re-learn how to orgasm through more gentle means. Yes, it takes time and effort and open communication. And, not only does it take time and effort when it comes to sex, but it also takes committment and the same approach when it comes to him masturbating. It also takes a shift in thinking, i.e. not "my pleasure is most important" but "my pleasure comes from her pleasure, I do not want my orgasm at the expense of her pain, I want to make sex mutual."

I think that the healthy thing would be to get together with one's partner and figure it out. What will make it better? How? And then start solving it. Whatever it takes. Because going through one's marriage like this ... just sounds awful. I just don't think anyone should experience this. It's not right.









How exactly is he supposed to learn (or re-learn) how to orgasm, if he can't _feel_ anything unless he's being rough?

The brain may well be the most sexual organ, but it has to have some sort of feedback from the penis, if he's getting nothing from it, then what exactly is he supposed to do if he won't restore and get at least some of the sensitivity back?

That's like telling every man with some sort of physiological problem with his penis leading to erectile dysfunction or no feeling that it's all his own fault he can't orgasm because he hasn't relearned how to do it!

Read some of the stories on this board, there's couples who have completely given up on sex because it is now so painful for the woman. Circumcision _does_ destroy physical relationships. The information _has_ to get out there, feelings will be hurt, but ignorance allows it to continue.


----------



## Ecstatic (Aug 13, 2007)

I understand. I'm a moderator of a board dealing with sexuality. It's a very mainstream board, though. Pretty much every man on there is circumcised.

From what I understand, from those men who post that they feel nothing during intercourse unless they go fast/rough, is that, to overcome this, they changed a few things in their routines. 1. they started masturbating much more gently, and completely stopped any rough or quick masturbation. 2. they had intercourse very gently, no roughness. And they kept at this, for months. They weren't able to orgasm at first at all, and needed help getting there via other means. With time, a lot of them were able to orgasm and were able to feel more than they had before.

This is actually common with a lot of male virgins who first have sex. Some of them use very rough masturbation techniques and when they start having intercourse they simply can not get off. Until they change their habits.

If a man has been roughly handling his penis for most of his life ... he will be de-sentizied to gentle sensations, on top of the circumcision affect. Take away the rough handling, and eventually the ability to feel some of those sensations comes back. Obviously, not like an uncircumcised male would feel ... but, still better than before when rough was the standard.

Of course, it's all individual too. Every man reacts differently. I understand that.

Conversely, there are other means to stimulation than intercourse. If pain is such a problem, it seems logical that gentle/brief intercourse can be part of the whole sexual experience ... but the orgasm can come from other activities. Which, surely, is better than an orgasm at the painful expense of one's partner!

It comes down to the attitude. Do I want my pleasure at the expense of my partner or do I want to try and change that? That attitude is there, regardless of foreskin. And it's a bad attitude, IMO, one which should have no place in a relationship.







Change the attitude, and you change the sex. Because changing that attitude makes one become pro-active, and look for ways to make things better. Maybe it's restoration, maybe it's simply having an orgasm through other means, maybe it's trying to re-learn masturbation and sex, etc. Whatever it is, a pro-active attitude makes all the difference in terms of fixing the problem.

I didn't want to hijack this thread.







Maybe it's not appropriate, or out of line, but I really feel upset for all of you who experience painful intercourse. I mean, sex should be mutual ... it really just saddens me when it's not.







Anyway, I'm sorry for hijacking.

Back on topic, lol.


----------



## AXEius (Jul 8, 2006)

Men often use rough masturbation techniques because they can hardly feel their genitals. I know, im circumcised and had to use as little lube as i could so i could get enough friction on my glans so i could have and orgasm. This would sometimes lead do abrasions or little cuts in the skin that i would have to wait until they healed to use my penis again. I always had to use lube i never even know you didn't have to use lube if you had a foreskin. Now i am restored i never have to use lube, in fact most of the time direct stimulation with out my foreskin is to much. My hands have always been somewhat rough which was not a problem when i could hardly feel my penis. Now only my wife can use direct stimulation on me because her hands are much softer and its still mind blowing when she does. Orgasms use to feel very much like having to sprint to find a bathroom and then the great relief when you finally get to pee. I had to work so hard to get to an orgasm and the only thing that felt good was the orgasm which wasn't much better than taking a good pee. now,after restoring its like being driven in a Cadillac on the way to eat at your favorite restaurant. You get to enjoy all the sites and sounds on the way there, you can tell the driver to take the long way and go down the scenic beach route, and when you finally get there it is the best meal you have ever had, every time........Yes restoring has made that much of a difference in my sex life. So when people sit here and say that its in the mans head or in the womans head, or just go use some lube (like humans were created and need fixing by the intimate lube industry so they can have sex), it kinda pisses me off. I know what it is like to be circumcised and what it is like to be restored, my wife knows what i was like before i was restored, she knows that she needed lube before and now she doesn't. Until someone has gone through restoration or the inverse as and adult, how can they say that the problems circumcision causes is actually made up "its in their heads". ITS NOT. Circumcision greatly effects sex in a negative way and restoration FIXES many of the problems created by circumcision in nearly equal but positive way. Circumcised men aren't deformed, they are mutilated. Circumcised penises ARE broken and disabled by qwuak doctors and NON surgical restoration helps to fix much of what was done without more knives. Humans weren't born needing lube. humans weren't born to hurt their penises to have orgasms. humans weren't born to have to restore their mutilated penises. Humans were made that way by circumcision!

Humans were not born to be circumcised!


----------



## BamaDude (Aug 17, 2006)

Right on AXEius!














:

Heck, according to Moses Maimonides, the problems that AXEius, me, and other cut guys suffer are _supposed_ to be part of being circumcised! In fact, these problems are _the whole point of the operation_!

Check it out: http://www.cirp.org/library/cultural/maimonides/


----------



## transformed (Jan 26, 2007)

I wouldn't want anyone to suffer...but I do not think a wife needs to come to her husband and pressure him to change his penis. I think its bad for business. It would be in my marriage anyways.

If a man comes to the conclusion on his own, great. If he wants to stay cut, great. I support my hubby in whatever he wants to do with his penis.


----------



## jenP (Aug 22, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AXEius* 
Circumcised men aren't deformed, they are mutilated.

Excellent point. It takes brave men to overcome the instinctive need to protect their ego (by refusing to see anything "wrong" with their penis) and instead stand up and say, " I was mutilated and I'm MAD AS HELL! This has got to stop! Not one more child should ever be violated again!"

Some of our circ'd husbands are okay in spite of it, some of them are really suffering (as are their wives), and I don't believe it is a put-down or demeaning to the man to honestly admit that something is missing from his body.

Jen


----------



## Mommiska (Jan 3, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Laggie* 
Wow, who knew I was killing the mood by applying lube? DH sure doesn't.







The clitoris also is not self-lubricating and needs lube applied regularly - does that kill the mood too? I hope not, because we've been enjoying it all this time









I don't mean to make light of this issue - I do agree that intact is generally more comfortable - but I think your reasons why using lube won't work are a bit silly. Of course, I'm a bit of a lube junkie, no matter the status of my partner's foreskin, so I guess I'm biased.

I did *not* say that applying lube in and of itself kills the mood. Nor was I talking about a sexual relationship in which rough hard sex causing soreness for the female partner wasn't an issue (which it seems it isn't for you).

What I DID say was that if someone has a de-sensitised penis and needs rough sex (and lots of it) in order to climax - that person may well need to stop having sex (in the middle of all of the pounding that he NEEDS in order to climax) to reapply lube (so that his wife isn't so sore afterwards)...

which could very well be a mood killer _for someone who has trouble climaxing anyway_.

That's what many of the women here are describing at any rate - men who have trouble climaxing without very hard pounding that in turn leaves the women very sore.

Yet they're told just to get more lube and all will suddenly be well? Come on.

If you read their stories, it clearly won't. It's condescending to tell someone that you know how to fix their sexual problems, and if they just get enough lube, that will do the trick.

As someone else said on another thread - if someone is having problems with soreness and chaffing after sex, it's a pretty good bet they've already thought of using lube and plenty of it - and it clearly isn't solving their problems.







:

My partner is intact, and we tried lube when we were first married (had it recommended to us by our friends - the males all happened to be circed). And to be honest, for me, even trying it was a huge old mood killer (messy, yucky, ick). Luckily, we quickly realised that we didn't need it, so just threw it away.

So I can easily see how it could be a mood killer for _some_ women as well - although in my original post, I was referring to it making orgasm more difficult for the desensitised man.


----------



## Mommiska (Jan 3, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AXEius* 
Men often use rough masturbation techniques because they can hardly feel their genitals. I know, im circumcised and had to use as little lube as i could so i could get enough friction on my glans so i could have and orgasm. This would sometimes lead do abrasions or little cuts in the skin that i would have to wait until they healed to use my penis again.

I always had to use lube i never even know you didn't have to use lube if you had a foreskin. Now i am restored i never have to use lube, in fact most of the time direct stimulation with out my foreskin is to much. My hands have always been somewhat rough which was not a problem when i could hardly feel my penis. Now only my wife can use direct stimulation on me because her hands are much softer and its still mind blowing when she does.

Orgasms use to feel very much like having to sprint to find a bathroom and then the great relief when you finally get to pee. I had to work so hard to get to an orgasm and the only thing that felt good was the orgasm which wasn't much better than taking a good pee. now,after restoring its like being driven in a Cadillac on the way to eat at your favorite restaurant. You get to enjoy all the sites and sounds on the way there, you can tell the driver to take the long way and go down the scenic beach route, and when you finally get there it is the best meal you have ever had, every time........Yes restoring has made that much of a difference in my sex life.

So when people sit here and say that its in the mans head or in the womans head, or just go use some lube (like humans were created and need fixing by the intimate lube industry so they can have sex), it kinda pisses me off.

I know what it is like to be circumcised and what it is like to be restored, my wife knows what i was like before i was restored, she knows that she needed lube before and now she doesn't. Until someone has gone through restoration or the inverse as and adult, how can they say that the problems circumcision causes is actually made up "its in their heads". ITS NOT. Circumcision greatly effects sex in a negative way and restoration FIXES many of the problems created by circumcision in nearly equal but positive way.

Circumcised men aren't deformed, they are mutilated. Circumcised penises ARE broken and disabled by quack doctors and NON surgical restoration helps to fix much of what was done without more knives. Humans weren't born needing lube. humans weren't born to hurt their penises to have orgasms. humans weren't born to have to restore their mutilated penises. Humans were made that way by circumcision!

Humans were not born to be circumcised!

I thought that this should be repeated.


----------



## KBecks (Jan 3, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MCKH* 
I am married to a happily circumsized man who is also onboard with us not circumsizing our baby, due next month (we know it's a boy.) I think he would see a restoration as unnecessary, painful and risky as a circumcision, and thus would not choose the former for himself or the latter for our child.

Congrats on the upcoming birth of your baby boy!


----------



## salt_phoenix (May 10, 2007)

Thanks to all of you SO MUCH for your input. I really needed to hear all of the things said here, for and against restoration...

I guess I understand the situation BETTER, as to why someone wouldn't WANT to restore, but I guess I just don't AGREE with it. I will probably give dh the link and let him read for himself from those who have and have not done it.

I just get so angry that this ever happened at all, because here we are with a situation that was never meant to be a situation at all. Sure his penis "works just fine". He urinates with it, he procreates with it, and yes, it brings him and me, pleasure. It's attractive, functional and there is "nothing wrong with it the way it is". However, like the differences between tearing thru a drive thru, and getting driven to your favorite resteraunt... I KNOW I'm getting cheated, I'm pretty sure he is too...

*shrug*
I hope that in time, as he gets a little older he will find less to be embarrassed about in reclaiming what was wrongfully taken from him. I hope he can find it within himself to strive for a more sensitive state somewhere down the line. If that happens, great!
If not, then I guess he will have to deal with the reality of NOT restoring, and what that means. It really IS his penis, but I don't know that he will like where the uncut version is taking him ultimately.









For the men who HAVE restored: What do you wish someone (anyone, wife included) would have told you, showed you or helped you with before you decided to restore? Is there a way I can support and encourage the choice to restore without it seeming like a demand? (it's not a demand, or i would have never married a cut man in the first place)
Did you come to the decision finally on your own, or did your partner have a larger part to play?
Do you have any specific advice for me? For HIM?

THANKS AGAIN for all your replies. They have all been helpful.


----------



## phatchristy (Jul 6, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jenP* 
on topic, anyway, my husband doesn't want to go around with contraptions taped to his dick for months on end.

You don't need to use devices or tape. It is possible to do manual restoration, but it does often take longer.


----------



## salt_phoenix (May 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phatchristy* 
You don't need to use devices or tape. It is possible to do manual restoration, but it does often take longer.

heh heh.. how MUCH longer, and can i do it to dh while he's not paying attention? alseep?







(maybe he'll apprectiate the extra attention







)

honestly, when he's flaccid, it is a "loose circ" I can stretch it long enough to cover his entire penis... THEN WHAT?!?!


----------



## phatchristy (Jul 6, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *salt_phoenix* 
heh heh.. how MUCH longer, and can i do it to dh while he's not paying attention? alseep?







(maybe he'll apprectiate the extra attention







)

honestly, when he's flaccid, it is a "loose circ" I can stretch it long enough to cover his entire penis... THEN WHAT?!?!









Um, I think if you want specifics you'll have to pm me.

If you manually restore w/o using a retainer (to cover the glans) then what basically happens is there is a point where you get enough skin that it doesn't just bunch up behind the glans when it is flaccid, it will start to creep over it.

It honestly gives a LOT of sensitivity a lot quicker (weeks actually) if they keep the glans covered...but if your DH is not willing to do that (using tape or a retainer) you can still apply tension to the skin and expand the inner foreskin.


----------



## dinahx (Sep 17, 2005)

What's the lowest effort method of restoration. My DH wants to leave his "just like it is" but it is SO tempting to me because it is only a semi-circ! Such potential! If there was a low effort way to do it, I bet I could talk him into it.


----------



## thixle (Sep 26, 2007)

Is there a support group or chatroom for wives/women/partners that want their men restored? Or are helping to restore?

I've got a lot of the same questions as salt_phoenix... and I know a few questions I want answered don't belong here


----------



## PJJ (Sep 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daisyuk* 
Actually, getting pounded until you are sore, lube or not, and knowing that the after effects are going to last for days are pretty much the mood killer. So much so that the "mood" doesn't happen and gets avoided at all costs.

Sorry, like it or not, circumcision _is_ the cause of a LOT of difficulties, and it's this refusal to recognise it that allows mothers to keep on cutting. Some feelings are going to have to get hurt somewhere along the line, because people HAVE to know and recognise that cutting up a man's genitals is NOT going to do anything to better his or his partner's sex life.

That's just the way it is.

With any uncomfortable truth, it is so hard for others to see...

I once thought that I had a problem not being tight enough with my circ partner. Boy, it sure was the opposite for my intact husband!

I am so happy I got lucky.


----------



## Greg B (Mar 18, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *salt_phoenix* 
For the men who HAVE restored: What do you wish someone (anyone, wife included) would have told you, showed you or helped you with before you decided to restore? Is there a way I can support and encourage the choice to restore without it seeming like a demand? (it's not a demand, or i would have never married a cut man in the first place)
Did you come to the decision finally on your own, or did your partner have a larger part to play?
Do you have any specific advice for me? For HIM?

THANKS AGAIN for all your replies. They have all been helpful. 

Well, I found out about it and was compelled to try it. My wife was an aprehensive observer at first. After she could feel the improvements (just a month or so) then she became a strong suppporter.

So I can't really put myself in your DH's shoes. And each of us is very different in how we react to things, suggestions, etc. So it is hard to give suggestions.

I think, if it was me, and you would every so often say "look at this, what do you think about that?" or "I can't imagine how that would feel, read this and see what you think." Then it would make me think about it more. Of course he is probably wary, now that you have discussed it a lot, so it may take a while.

So much is in the tone of your voice, your inflection, your pacing...the nonverbals. And it is a tedious and long process. So I do not think everyone is prepared to do it. Shrug.

Keep reading. Keep information flowing as a mutual exploration. Be curious. Let him find his own way. Be patient. He will certainly have to be if he decides to restore, smile.

Regards


----------



## smeisnotapirate (Aug 24, 2007)

I think also it's hard for women (especially ones who have only slept with circed partners, which is all too common in the US) to change the way they think about sexual dysfunction. Until I came here and started reading, I always assumed that in college because of stress or whatever, I just dried up. I didn't equate it to breaking up with my intact boyfriend and dating circed men. I assumed that it was my problem, and as such, should be treated in the American way - treat the symptoms when you can't avoid facing them, and deny, deny, DENY!









It's been difficult for me to change my thinking that it's actually not me, but something that was done to my husband. Luckily he's very good about stopping when it gets too much (he's a C2, so he's very tightly circed and this happens a lot), but the lube factor... it's the bane of our sexual existence.

I also wish I could magically interest my DH in restoring. I'm excited that there may be a solution that has nothing to do with medication, and totally willing to try. But the fact remains, if he's not -







. We fight this battle for our boys to have the right to do with their bodies what they will. Right now, my DH is exercising that right to stay the way he is, and I couldn't take that choice away from him by trying to coerce him into it, even if I thought it was for BOTH of our own good.

And honestly, who knows how he'll feel in a week? A year? Ten years? I will continue reading articles, continue giving him research and the means to restore, but the decision is ultimately his. And that's what we fight this battle for in the first place, so I'm ok with that.

Though, yeah, salt_phoenix, I totally know how you feel about wishing he'd just get off his butt and do it already!


----------



## mommymarliah (Jun 29, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daisyuk* 
Actually, getting pounded until you are sore, lube or not, and knowing that the after effects are going to last for days are pretty much the mood killer. So much so that the "mood" doesn't happen and gets avoided at all costs.

Sorry, like it or not, circumcision _is_ the cause of a LOT of difficulties, and it's this refusal to recognise it that allows mothers to keep on cutting. Some feelings are going to have to get hurt somewhere along the line, because people HAVE to know and recognise that cutting up a man's genitals is NOT going to do anything to better his or his partner's sex life.

That's just the way it is.

so, so true....I have tried nicely to tell DH this but he doesn't hear me.....ugh. :/ Every time this happens (which is no where near as frequent anymore since our sex life is practically dead) I just get REALLY mad at my IL's for having done this to him. And honestly I get a bit resentful at him too for being unwilling to restore. I'd like to think if there was something I could do that would ease his discomfort that I would, but who knows....


----------



## Ron_Low (May 11, 2007)

Hi,
I've read through this whole thread and I'm going to respond to several people's concerns without quoting them. I started tugging in 2001 and I've helped over 9000 men restore, so I wouldn't be bragging to say I have some expertise. My recent TIME interview on restoration:
http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...679981,00.html

>> The glans isn't the most sensitive part anyway <<

Indeed. The biggest improvement since I restored is the awesome feeling of mobile slack skin. My wife loves it for intercourse. For foreplay it lets her work on me without any risk of rubbing me raw/numb.

The next most significant change is the special new "itch" that the skin between the scar and the glans now has. This skin was mucosal inner foreskin before I was cut at birth, and now that it's protected (it faces in all the time), it's like I'm seeing in newly-invented colors. Glans sensitivity really is not significant. The type of subcutaneous nerve endings within the glans are responsible for pain perception, not pleasure.

>> restoration is a huge undertaking <<

Nah! It can be as simple as wearing a comfortable tapeless skin retainer; less effort than when a man pulls his underwear on. The only lifestyle change is using a stall to urinate instead of a urinal, and even that's optional.

>> there will be pain <<

Only if you're doing it wrong. Persistant gentle tension will cause up to an inch of new skin per year to grow. Sometimes tapes or a device can get out of adjustment (because the skin is in flux due to temperature changes and stuff) and there might be a mild pinching or just plain strange sensation until he can get to some privacy and re-adjust.

>> It's surgical <<

NO! Surgery is a terrible idea for anyone who has enough slack to start non-surgically. I've met over a dozen surgical restorers. Only one was happy with the result. Typically, surgery leaves you with more numb incision lines, hairy foreskin that's thicker than shaft skin, not much slack, and ultra tight scrotum (most techniques borrow scrotal skin).

>> he doesn't want to be taped <<

99% of cut men can start with a tapeless method or switch after less than 3 months of taping.

>> with condoms, the slack foreskin has no gliding action? <<

That has not been my experience. With a condom, the condom-covered skin acts just like the slinky skin does otherwise. Note I don't have a fenulum, so intact guys may have a different story.

>> an unrestored cut man doesn't feel, goes for too long, is too rough <<

That WAS my experience. I've been scolded for getting too explicit here before, but I'll try to be clinical. Before restoring, I could go for way longer than my wife wanted. She would climax several times and if I really concentrated I could finish. Now, if I concentrate on her I can go as long as she likes, but the thing is that it's so wonderful the whole time, I'm in no hurry to get to the big finish. I focus a lot more on using my hands and other resources for her. We are both having the best sex of our lives in our mid-40s. Oddly, while I could never climax from oral stimulation before restoring, I could finish from just one of her fingers tickling my frenular area for a long time with no lube. We haven't discovered a comparable mode during intercourse.

>> did men's partner's persuade them to restore? <<

Mine thought I was crazy (until we stopped laughing and I explained why I was serious).

>> what's the lowest-effort method? <<

Skin retaining (without inducing much growth) is utterly effortless. Men use o-rings from the hardware store, or a specially designed silicone cone, or just a cut-up baby bottle nipple. The inner skin and glans will get more supple and sensitive in a matter of weeks, and some slackening will occur, especially if he manages to sleep with the skin retained (due to the stretching of nocturnal erections).

>> Is there a wives' resource? <<

Today I will add a wives/partners section to the restorers' forum I moderate:
http://Foreskin-Restoration.net/forum

>> >> Nobody raised the objection that a cut guy might not want to smell like an intact man, or have smegma.

I would just say that he will never see smegma if he rinses with clear water daily in the shower. I do get a faint sweet musky aroma that is much milder than any female scent I've encountered, and my wife swears she can't taste anything. I never notice it unless I'm camping or something and have to skip showering for a day.

Restoration is very worthwhile, but I guess I can understand a guy not wanting to admit there's room for improvement.


----------



## AXEius (Jul 8, 2006)

well ron really said it all, a very good post. I am in complete agreement with ron, he really knows what he is talking about. I just want to reiterate there are many methods of restoring and there is more than one way to unskin a cat (maybe not as funny as i thought it would be, oh well lol). "retainer" and manual methods are the best way to get started. There are many ways to restore once you get past the begining stage, even ones that dont use tape (tape was my favorite because of its comfort and reliablity). Restoring should never hurt , at worst it is mildly uncomfortable for short periods. Last, is that surgical restoration is an option, but if your doing restoration for the benefits then there is really no point in having someone cut all your foreskin nerves again, besides the few pictures ive seen of surgically restored foreskins were no where near as natural looking as non-surgically restored foreskin, they almost looked as mutilated as a circumcised penis.


----------



## l_olive (Jan 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *transformed* 
I just feel bad for the men. I mean, how would you feel if someone told you there was something wrong with your anatomy? How sexy would you feel?

If I had had much of the working parts of my genitals removed at birth, I would probably not question the fact that there was something wrong with my anatomy.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *transformed* 
If you are having sexual issues, it is possible that they are caused by other reasons as well.

Yeah, and if you're rowing a boat with only one oar, it is possible that the fish in the lake are making you go around in circles.

Will we ever get to the day when everyone will understand that circumcision damages the sexual organs? And damaged sexual organs don't work like undamaged ones? Genital mutilation is not just something that a little extra lube can fix.


----------



## l_olive (Jan 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *transformed* 
Sheesh....take their feelings into consideration.

Just thinking about this some more, because truthfully, your posts in this thread have upset me a great deal. You come off as incredibly dismissive towards those of us who have suffered a great deal.

I would like to ask how it is more considerate to question a man's (or woman's) sexual technique than it is to place a large part of the blame for sexual dysfunction on the fact that he has had a part of his anatomy amputated?

To me, it's much less hurtful to say to my husband, "Sex with you hurts me because, unfortunately, you're missing a vital part of your genitals," than it is to say, "You hurt me because you suck at sex."

Or are you simply placing the blame for dysfunction solely on the woman and her technique?

Somehow, I'm just missing the rationale behind your dismissive posts.


----------



## ProtoLawyer (Apr 16, 2007)

My SO has facial scarring from a car accident. It's not immediately noticeable, but if you talk to him for awhile, or you're up close, it's pretty extensive. He could have some plastic surgery (or, less invasively, he could use some creams, wear his hair differently, etc.) to reduce or hide the appearance of scarring. He doesn't, though.

My friend lost her left breast to cancer. She could have reconstruction -- her husband wants her to. She could also wear a prosthesis. She doesn't.

Reasons for wanting or not wanting to "fix" what is broken are personal, as personal as deciding whether something is "broken" in the first place. My friend does consider herself, or her breast, broken; but she's elected not to "fix" it, even though her husband has told her he might be more sexually fulfilled if she was "whole." (Notice a parallel?) She doesn't want to go through more surgery, and she thinks the prosthesis is just silly, uncomfortable, and reminds her every day she has cancer (in remission). She's gotten used to her appearance as-is.

My SO, on the other hand, doesn't consider his face broken, even though most people would disagree. Yes, it's disfigured. Yes, it's not supposed to be that way, and but for the negligence of another, his face would be, if you will, "intact." But he doesn't see it that way...he just considers it a part of who he is. He is circ'd (wouldn't circ a son if he had one, though), and it doesn't bother him and it's fine by me as well (and yes, I have been with intact men, too). I'd no more expect him to restore for me (even if it had the potential of making sex "better") as he'd expect me to change my body, even to "fix" something that was "broken," for him. If he wants to do it for himself (and he is aware such a process exists), lovely. If not, that's fine too.


----------



## stik (Dec 3, 2003)

In defense of those who think there's more than foreskin at issue here -

The phrase "lie back and think of England" originated in a time and place when most men were intact. There's a significant body of historical evidence to demonstrate that foreskin does not automatically make for tolerable sex.


----------



## Mommiska (Jan 3, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *stik* 
In defense of those who think there's more than foreskin at issue here -

The phrase "lie back and think of England" originated in a time and place when most men were intact. There's a significant body of historical evidence to demonstrate that foreskin does not automatically make for tolerable sex.

It also originated in a time and place in which women were not supposed to be sexual beings and were supposed to abhor the sexual act. So they were told to 'lie back and think of England' because they had to do their 'wifely duty' (although they were, as well brought up women, NOT supposed to enjoy it) and they also needed to procreate.

I think that phrase was dealing with an entirely different topic.

I really, really think that people should do searches and read the stories of some of the women (and men) who post here. No, having a foreskin does not automatically make someone a good lover.

And lacking a foreskin does not automatically make someone a bad lover.

But _in some situations_ circumcision can have extremely negative effects on a couple's sex life. As in - they can't have sex, because the abrasion is so painful for the woman; they can't conceive naturally, because the man is unable to ejaculate through vaginal intercourse; the man's penis gets splits/etc on it from intercourse, etc.

ProtoLawyer - I do understand what you are getting at. And to a certain extent, I agree with you.

However, if I were in a relationship where having sex with my partner was very important to me, but caused me significant, persistent pain. And this was caused by the extent of my partner's circumcision - then I think that this situation needs to be addressed _by both partners together_ as it is negatively impacting both partners.

No, a man should not be forced/pressured into restoring. It seems to be implied that a loving wife would accept her husband how he is and just get on with it.

But it seems to me that a loving husband would want to talk this issue out with his wife, so that her needs could be met as well. After all, there are two of them in this relationship and his circumcision is affecting both of them.

Yes, it is his body, and he must decide for himself what he wants to do with what he has been left with, after _someone else_ decided to cut him at birth. (ironic, isn't it?)

And perhaps for some men, restoration isn't in the cards for their own personal reasons.

But that leaves the partner in a very, very difficult position. I think this position needs to be acknowledged and not just glossed over (especially not in this thread).

It just isn't fair (or kind) to tell someone that they need to just deal with the situation on their own. In a partnership, _both_ partners need to be sensitive to, and consider the needs of the other.

Incidentally, I don't see the parallel between women wishing their husbands would restore because sex is _physically painful_ for them, and a man wishing his wife would have her breast reconstructed because he would like the way it looked better.

Restoration is NOT about appearance, in the vast majority of cases. It is about function.


----------



## charmander (Dec 30, 2003)

I asked DH once if he'd be interested in restoring, but he said he wasn't. And honestly, there are no problems in our sex life (i.e. intercourse is not painful) that are caused by his being circumcised. I certainly wouldn't want him to do it unless HE wanted to.

Why wouldn't men want to do it? I dunno - maybe it's just not worth the hassle if they think their penis works just fine (which is how my husband feels about his.) In other words, he doesn't feel as though a body part is missing, or that he is mutilated or anything, so restoration is simply not an issue for him. Those are HIS thoughts about himself, and he is entitled to him, and they are perfectly valid.


----------



## Daisyuk (May 15, 2005)

I think it is incredibly dismissive and rather offensive to equate something visual like a scar or bigger/smaller/missing boobs, with a body part that doesn't have its full function and is causing so much pain to the other party that they don't want to have relations with it. If I was causing so much suffering to my partner, especially during an act that is supposed to bring us together, not drive us apart, I'd do my utmost to rectify the situation, what is so terrible about that? And exactly WHY is a woman supposed to put up with something that hurts?

Some of the posters in this thread just don't get it.


----------



## secretresistance (Dec 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ProtoLawyer* 
My SO has facial scarring from a car accident. It's not immediately noticeable, but if you talk to him for awhile, or you're up close, it's pretty extensive. He could have some plastic surgery (or, less invasively, he could use some creams, wear his hair differently, etc.) to reduce or hide the appearance of scarring. He doesn't, though.

My friend lost her left breast to cancer. She could have reconstruction -- her husband wants her to. She could also wear a prosthesis. She doesn't.

Reasons for wanting or not wanting to "fix" what is broken are personal, as personal as deciding whether something is "broken" in the first place.

The damage of circumcision is more than cosmetic, though. (And please know I'm not trying to minimize the possible hardships of living with a unique physical attribute.







)

DP is pretty educated about restoration, but has no real drive to pursue it. He says he couldn't handle sex that's better than what we already have (







) and more seriously, he's squeamish about such an intimate and unusual commitment.

I wish he would go for it, _because_ of how great our sex life is. I don't want it to fade away as we age!

Edited to add that I just saw that I've cross posted with a lot of people saying the same thing about the mastectomy comparison. Not trying to beat a dead horse!


----------



## charmander (Dec 30, 2003)

Quote:

think it is incredibly dismissive and rather offensive to equate something visual like a scar or bigger/smaller/missing boobs, with a body part that doesn't have its full function and is causing so much pain to the other party that they don't want to have relations with it. If I was causing so much suffering to my partner, especially during an act that is supposed to bring us together, not drive us apart, I'd do my utmost to rectify the situation, what is so terrible about that? And exactly WHY is a woman supposed to put up with something that hurts?

Some of the posters in this thread just don't get it.

But not everyone suffers because their partner is circumsized. So this doesn't apply to everyone here.


----------



## secretresistance (Dec 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *charmander* 
But not everyone suffers because their partner is circumsized. So this doesn't apply to everyone here.

I would say that every circumcised man has suffered in at least one significant way. It's a violation to be surgically wounded for no good reason. And most of the time there's going to be lots of pain.







:

Depending on your thoughts about what ritualized genital mutilation might do to a society, the damage of circumcision could be exponentially bigger than at first glance. Hippy-dippy, ok, but I honestly believe that there is more suffering than might be obvious when so many of us are welcomed into the world with violence.

Not that restoration is going to fix any of that. Sigh.


----------



## charmander (Dec 30, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *secretresistance* 
I would say that every circumcised man has suffered in at least one significant way. It's a violation to be surgically wounded for no good reason. And most of the time there's going to be lots of pain.







:

Depending on your thoughts about what ritualized genital mutilation might do to a society, the damage of circumcision could be exponentially bigger than at first glance. Hippy-dippy, ok, but I honestly believe that there is more suffering than might be obvious when so many of us are welcomed into the world with violence.

Not that restoration is going to fix any of that. Sigh.

Yes, I agree with you. But, what I meant was - not everyone's _sex life_ suffers because of circumcision.


----------



## secretresistance (Dec 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *charmander* 
Yes, I agree with you. But, what I meant was - not everyone's _sex life_ suffers because of circumcision.

I can almost agree with that, but I'm just not absolutely sure.

I suppose those who see no improvement from restoration (if there are people who fit that category) are probably less vocal than those who experience a gain in sensitivity.


----------



## ProtoLawyer (Apr 16, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daisyuk* 
I think it is incredibly dismissive and rather offensive to equate something visual like a scar or bigger/smaller/missing boobs, with a body part that doesn't have its full function and is causing so much pain to the other party that they don't want to have relations with it. If I was causing so much suffering to my partner, especially during an act that is supposed to bring us together, not drive us apart, I'd do my utmost to rectify the situation, what is so terrible about that? And exactly WHY is a woman supposed to put up with something that hurts?

Some of the posters in this thread just don't get it.

First: No, a woman need not put up with something that hurts.

But I answered the original question: why WOULDN'T a man want to restore. I'm not being dismissive; I'm offering a response that is personal to my situation. I said it's personal -- and it is. My partner doesn't want to restore because he has no desire to -- and there is no extrinsic reason that might change his mind. He isn't hurting me. I've not asked him to do anything about it.

If your partner is actually hurting you, then yes, I think he needs to work on ways to rectify that. If my partner was hurting me, and we determined it was because he was circumcised, then I'm sure he'd research restoration, as well as other ways of stopping the hurt, and I'd hope he'd come to a reasonable decision.

I didn't want to go into detail, or play the "injury to a penis is worse than/not as bad as injury to another part of the body" game, but that car accident (he was hit by a drunk driver) also stole a part of my SO's brain, and the sight in one eye. He really should be dead right now. He lost a lot of memory (this was before I met him); got most of it back but he still needs to make lists and get reminders. Had to relearn how to walk, feed himself, all that. He's got an upped chance of pretty much any neurological condition -- Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and yes, sexual dysfunction is a risk, too. It cost him his first marriage. That can't be fixed through any current technology, just worked around. (That's why I didn't bring it up before, because the analogy didn't make sense -- but I thought of a way it could.)

Now, let's say my SO's brain injury caused him anger-management problems -- well, it did (the injury wiped out a part of his brain that controlled anger and impulse control and he had to re-learn it from scratch), but let's say he was lashing out at me or his daughter as a result. (He hasn't.) I hope this is a better parallel than scars or breast reconstruction: he'd be doing something that hurt me, destroyed our trust, etc., even though it wasn't his fault. You better darn well believe that he'd (and we'd) be doing his utmost to rectify the situation, or I wouldn't be here anymore. That said: He may discover cognitive-behavior therapy is the best way to fix the situation. He may discover that medication, or prayer, or medication, or some experimental brain therapy, is the best way to fix the situation. I'd have to decide whether I can live with the fix he chose, and if not, what to do about it.

It's case-by-case. Maybe, if I had trouble with my partner's circumcision, he'd decide that restoration was not the right path, that there was another, better way to avoid hurting me--and I'd have to decide whether that other, better way was OK with me, and what to do if it wasn't.

Again, I'm not *disagreeing* per se with anyone -- just offering reasons that a man might not want to restore. They may not be relevant to your situation, but they are to mine.


----------



## Mommiska (Jan 3, 2002)

Proto-lawyer - that makes a lot of sense.

You and your SO sound like quite incredible, determined people.


----------



## ProtoLawyer (Apr 16, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommiska* 
Proto-lawyer - that makes a lot of sense.

You and your SO sound like quite incredible, determined people.

Thanks...he is, certainly. I'm just doing what makes sense.

And (OT) credit where it's due: his now-ex wife was an absolute saint through this. She nursed him back to health, put up with way more than most people would in that situation...in the end, he was just a different person from the one she married; their relationship shifted from wife/husband to caregiver/patient, and they couldn't make it work. (Something like 80% of marriages don't survive an accident like this -- and most of the ones that do are older, long-married couples.)

She got the worst of it...yeah, he's at a higher risk of neurological issues I'll have to deal with in 20-40 years, but I knew that going in and I willingly accepted the risk. She went into the marriage as most of us do, certainly not anticipating all of this.


----------



## smeisnotapirate (Aug 24, 2007)

My DH is tightly circumcised and yes, sometimes it is painful. If he gets too carried away, if we go too quickly and I'm not yet wet (since he has no lube of his own to help out), if we go too long and can't keep me wet (or don't apply lube frequently), etc. We now both know that all of our sexual "problems" are due to his circ.

But before I got on MDC in August, we had no idea. So we worked things out. He changed his techniques. We came up with a safe word for "too much." I frequently tell him to slow down or to give it a rest. And sure, our sex life isn't perfect (and in my opinion, isn't as good as it would be if he restored), but he doesn't yet see restoration as something he'd be willing to stick with. He always follows my lead when I tell him it's too much, never willfully hurts me, and I would never consider pressuring him outside of his comfort zone to start restoring, though I'd love him to come to the realization on his own.

It's his body - his choice.

He's compromised by changing his technique and by being very perceptive in the bedroom. And yes, many times one or the other of us (or both, on REALLY bad nights







) don't get the kind of pleasure we'd like. But is this something that will make or break our sex life? I hope not!

And people, we sometimes need a reminder of why we fight this battle: it's HIS body, and HIS choice. My DH doesn't want to restore: fine. He's made plenty of other changes that shows me that he REALLY cares about how I feel during sex. Just because he doesn't see restoring as an option doesn't mean he's not trying to rectify our problems in our sex life. Please remember that, and don't be dismissive of that.


----------



## smeisnotapirate (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daisyuk* 
I think it is incredibly dismissive and rather offensive to equate something visual like a scar or bigger/smaller/missing boobs, with a body part that doesn't have its full function and is causing so much pain to the other party that they don't want to have relations with it. If I was causing so much suffering to my partner, especially during an act that is supposed to bring us together, not drive us apart, I'd do my utmost to rectify the situation, what is so terrible about that? And exactly WHY is a woman supposed to put up with something that hurts?

Some of the posters in this thread just don't get it.

Oh, I wanted to say one more thing. Have you _seen_ some radical mastectomies? They are usually not pretty at all because the doctors are just taking out whatever is cancerous with no regards to looks. I can understand it being just as off-putting as painful sex, especially for those partners who remember what their partner's breast _used_ to look like.

My mom's teaching partner's husband broke down after a year and said that he'd tried and tried (and been to therapy over it!) but he just couldn't see her as sexually attractive any more since her radical mastectomy. It happens, and it's just as said and painful for both parties as what we're talking about.

I believe the comparison stands and stands well.


----------



## Mommiska (Jan 3, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *smeisnotapirate* 
He's compromised by changing his technique and by being very perceptive in the bedroom. And yes, many times one or the other of us (or both, on REALLY bad nights







) don't get the kind of pleasure we'd like. But is this something that will make or break our sex life? I hope not!

And people, we sometimes need a reminder of why we fight this battle: it's HIS body, and HIS choice. My DH doesn't want to restore: fine. He's made plenty of other changes that shows me that he REALLY cares about how I feel during sex. Just because he doesn't see restoring as an option doesn't mean he's not trying to rectify our problems in our sex life. Please remember that, and don't be dismissive of that.

I think many of us have been saying this - that the sexual problems caused by circ affect both partners, and both partners need to be involved in finding a solution that works (at least somewhat) for both of them.

It sounds like you and your dh are working together to try to work around the problems that you have, and that's great.

Other people have said that, at the moment for them, circ is not negatively affecting their sex life, so their partner doesn't feel the need to restore. Fair enough.

This is soooo individual. Every couple is going to be different. I've read some of the stories (and I'm sure people have kept many details private - this is a sensitive subject after all).

I'm fairly certain that there are some cases in which the adjustments you and your dh have made - just aren't going to work.

Again - every couple is different, and this is something that each couple needs to work out for themselves. But I think everyone needs to be careful that they don't assume that what works for them and their partner will work for every couple, you know?

As for the mastectomy analogy...in your example, there is more of a parallel. BUT - it still doesn't work for me. With the mastectomy, one partner is asking the other partner to undergo major surgery. Restoration just is not the same (yes, it's an undertaking, but it does not hold the same risks that an operation under general anesthetic does).

And there isn't anything about the woman's body that 'doesn't work right'. I would guess that the situation you are describing is an extreme one - and again, that couple would need to work out together what they are going to do about this issue.

All of these problems - and all so because everyone wants to do 'what everyone else is doing'.







It's crazy, isn't it?


----------



## smeisnotapirate (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommiska* 
I think many of us have been saying this - that the sexual problems caused by circ affect both partners, and both partners need to be involved in finding a solution that works (at least somewhat) for both of them.

It sounds like you and your dh are working together to try to work around the problems that you have, and that's great.

Other people have said that, at the moment for them, circ is not negatively affecting their sex life, so their partner doesn't feel the need to restore. Fair enough.

This is soooo individual. Every couple is going to be different. I've read some of the stories (and I'm sure people have kept many details private - this is a sensitive subject after all).

I'm fairly certain that there are some cases in which the adjustments you and your dh have made - just aren't going to work.

Again - every couple is different, and this is something that each couple needs to work out for themselves. But I think everyone needs to be careful that they don't assume that what works for them and their partner will work for every couple, you know?

As for the mastectomy analogy...in your example, there is more of a parallel. BUT - it still doesn't work for me. With the mastectomy, one partner is asking the other partner to undergo major surgery. Restoration just is not the same (yes, it's an undertaking, but it does not hold the same risks that an operation under general anesthetic does).

And there isn't anything about the woman's body that 'doesn't work right'. I would guess that the situation you are describing is an extreme one - and again, that couple would need to work out together what they are going to do about this issue.

All of these problems - and all so because everyone wants to do 'what everyone else is doing'.







It's crazy, isn't it?

It IS crazy, I totally agree. But I still think the mastectomy comparison holds. You could look at it this way too: a breast reconstruction is a one-time surgery (maybe two, depending on the kind you get), and then a recovery period. Yes, it has risks, just like any surgery. I'm not trying to gloss over that. Restoration is an everyday commitment for at least a year, if not YEARS (from what I've read). I think that's just as significant, and IMO, more of a commitment from the restorer.

I also agree that it's really individual, and that you're making good points. I'm not assuming that the things we've done would work for everyone, at all; just offering a point of view that says that a partner's care and love for their DW doesn't hinge upon restoration to solve pain problems (I heard a bit of that in a couple other posters' comments). I'm just trying to encourage women whose partners may not see restoration as an option that there can be other options that _may_ work for them that seem to work for us for the time being.


----------



## thixle (Sep 26, 2007)

This is going to be long and rambly because I can't make such emotional thoughts totally coherent even to myself. Enjoy!

See, since I had a forced, unconsenting episiotomy in 2005, DH and I have had (compared to what it was) no sex life. Of course, our sex life has been odd- I was pregnant 3 months after we met, with a hormone-fueled sex drive. We had only known each other for a year when our DD was born (and had only had wild and crazy sex together) and it was normal for a new mom to not want sex and have painful intercourse. Two years later, we have tried everything that could be done to me, for me, everything for sex just to not hurt me... I've seen several docs who say my episiotomy is healed well, good sensitivities, functional (hmm, sounds like responses to circ) and my perianum is as good as it is ever going to get. And I found out LAST WEEK that his tight circ could be the main problem, not the episiotomy... Last week. I am a fairly educated person, but had not REALLY thought about circumcision except that I would not cut off a body part of a perfectly healthy child (almost no one in my family is circ'ed for that reason alone- it hurts a baby). No one had ever told me that a tightly circ'ed peinis could cause ME pain.

I had not come to this section of MDC (though I've lurked elsewhere for years) because I'm already against circ, you see. I think the truth is PEOPLE JUST DON'T KNOW, and don't talk about it. So instead of saying, well, it could be an emotional issue, yadda yadda, everyone here should support the simple fact that restoration COULD help. If it is dismissed EVEN HERE, then how in the world is anyone going to take restoration as a valid suggestion? Yes, it is ultimately the man's decision because it is his body, but last time I checked, it was okay to try to sway someone you love to do what you think is in their best interest, or the best interest of the family unit.

I've been talking to my hubby about foreskin constantly for about a week... and it did irritate him. And he was defensive at first, and accidentally saw a stretching device (yipes!) but, he agrees that I have a valid point, his tight circ is part of the problem. And neither one of us knew. I've been with other peni in my life, and never connected the concept of loose skin to my enjoyment. He's never had sex any other way. It took my mutilation, two years, and hours of reading solid information for me to even consider it could be his penis (because, ladies, we all know our man's penis is absolutely perfect and god-forbid we talk about the functioning of a grown man's penis). So, together, last night, we decided that in the best interest of our marriage, we should commit to restoration. Actually, just try to develop some amount of loose skin and go from there (a 2-3 month commitment, as I understand it). And yes, I did take his feelings into account (I emphasized the positives) and made sure to tell him over and over, it wasn't anything he could control (just as he's been telling me about the episiotomy for 2 years)... But at this point, DH is just happy to have me pay attention to his penis, to take an interest in it. Because I finally became conditioned against sex. If it hurts no matter what, I'm not going to do it. If there is something that can be done to restore our sex life, or even just to have us (mostly me) become a sexual being again, then I'm going to try to get DH to do it









Two days ago, he said he would never wear anything that insane looking. Last night, he said that i would have to help him with the tapes.

Yes, there are reasons a man wouldn't want to restore, but the discussion shouldn't be dismissed with, "Cause it's stupid. Cause that's embarrassing. Cause it's my penis and I don't know any different." DH doesn't dream of long elephantine foreskin. Neither do I. But we do want out sex life back. And even if a man decides NOT to restore, HE and his partner should know that the option is there and CONSIDER the process.

Whew- that felt good to get off my chest


----------



## ProtoLawyer (Apr 16, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thixle* 
DH doesn't dream of long elephantine foreskin.











I hope nobody does (at least not the way I'm picturing it)...


----------



## thixle (Sep 26, 2007)

I've seen so much foreskin in the past week, it's hard to close my eyes







:
And I've been looking at restoration sites, not sites with the little babies because that is just heartbreaking. Like I said, I'm already anti-circ.

Luckily, DH and I met while in college and I was taking Life Drawing classes. Really quickly he learned to ignore how many peni I had my life







I think we had 6 different male models that semester.

That's what bugs me. I've uh, seen a lot. Consider myself educated and it just never crossed my mind about restoration. That it could relate to me. And there are 2 crazy positions that don't hurt, but sheesh, they are crazy positions and it's just not gonna happen for me.

From the OP:

Quote:

Any ideas on encouraging restoration in an otherwise educated man? He won't give me what I think of as a "good" excuse... just that "it's dumb".
See, The glans is supposed to be a moist, covered organ. That's the part I couldn't get over. It's not supposed to be dry. I would try to restore my eyelids if they were removed, or at least keep my eyes moist. I wouldn't let them get callused (would eyes do that?)... Anyway, that part alone makes me want him to cover himself for his own pleasure! Don't know if that angle might help you. I know it helped DH







:


----------



## thixle (Sep 26, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *transformed* 
I just feel bad for the men. I mean, how would you feel if someone told you there was something wrong with your anatomy? How sexy would you feel?

Sheesh....take their feelings into consideration.

I could never circ a baby because I know what I know, but the issue of my dh restoring is completley his issue.

If you are having sexual issues, it is possible that they are caused by other reasons as well.

But there is something wrong with circ'ed anatomy. It doesn't make you feel sexy. Dh has always been selfconcious of his scar (though he never came out and said it, he said a girl with braces bit him in HS, we looked really close last night and it is stitch markings). It is a non-consensual violation, as was my painful episiotomy. I was upset on a very deep level about the mutilation aspect. DH had to deal with me about that. And deal with my vagina's response to it. I have seen doctors about that. No one ever once suggested pain could be slightly related to Dh's circ. NO ONE. Not even each other. We weren't even aware that it was an option. Well, I had heard of it, but it seemed silly because of the contraptions. *salt_pheonix*: could this be why your hubby can't get a good reason?

But I went online for hours and came up with every concievable arguement I could and yep, I hurt his feelings and he hurt my feelings, but in the end he is really curious. Enough so that he is willing to try. And I think it was because I took the time to research it on a practical level-- and no, you don't have to put tape on or use any devices at all to start out. No surgery, no anything... Just, um, pull on your foreskin in the shower, hey after you pee too if you are feeling frisky.
And that's why it takes some men years from my understanding. Or the fact that they want LONG foreskin.
So, if your partner is too... whatever to agree to playing with his foreskin everyday, you could also play with his forskin. Restoration does not have to be a huge undertaking. One of the guys I read about had a huge amount of skin grow quicky from his regimine with out devices. So you really don't need all the weights and straps, etc. It can be fun and intimate and sexy if you want it to be. Really, I don't understand why a man wouldn't at least TRY that part either! And that is what hubby and I agreed on. Manual restoration until there are some gains and see how we both feel about the process as we go. There is no way he is going to tape a film canister to his penis and secure it over his shoulder with a piece of elastic at this time, though







He's not super gung ho about having foreskin per say, just having more play in the skin, but I have a feeling that eventually he will be


----------

