Circumcision 2
It is the presence of smegma that makes
male genital hygiene essential, for if it is not removed it eventually
sets up a disagreeable genital odor which is often so strong that it is
detectable at some feet from men so afflicted. Though smegma is unknown
among circumcised men, this practice of daily genital hygiene should be
carried out by them as well. Ideally, no man should ever embark on a
session of lovemaking without washing his penis, especially if he expects
his partner to offer fellatio.
Another benefit derived from circumcision
is the elimination of such complaints as phimosis, paraphimosis, venereal
thrush, balanitis and other conditions involving the foreskin. Phimosis is
present when the foreskin is so long and the opening so narrow that the
foreskin cannot be pulled back. Since the glans can never be cleansed
all kinds of irritations and inflammations can result, while in many cases
there are adhesions of the foreskin and glans which can be extremely
painful. Paraphimosis occurs when the unretractable foreskin is suddenly,
by some violent movement during masturbation or lovemaking, forced back
behind the rim and is so tight that it cannot be pulled forward, even when
the penis goes limp. The effect is a strangulated penis, a very painful
condition which prevents the circulation of the blood to the glans.
Immediate circumcision is the only remedy. Balanitis and venereal thrush
are inflammatory conditions of the foreskin and glans which can be
quite unpleasant.
On the other hand, those who are against circumcision of the newborn can justifiably point to certain drawbacks to
which the circumcised infant can be susceptible. Apart from the fact that
there is very rarely an anatomical necessity for the operation to be
carried out at birth, and that only a minority will later need the
operation for anatomical reasons, there is an infinitesimal element of
risk in the operation itself.
There is very rarely an anatomical
necessity for a newborn child to be circumcised, and some of my readers
may wonder why. Well, for quite a number of years after birth - indeed,
into adulthood - the foreskin undergoes development and changes. It is
first discernible in the embryo at about eight weeks, when it appears as a
ring of skin at the base of the glans. Thereafter, this ring of skin
gradually grows up the glans until, by the time the baby is born, the
whole penis glans is covered by it. At one stage - about the sixteenth week
- the surfaces adjoining the foreskin become fused, but thereafter
gradually begin to separate. However, though at birth, in the vast
majority of babies, the tip of the foreskin has separated sufficiently to
allow the passing of urine, it cannot be pulled back over the glans.
In fact, in three out of four babies it is still unretractable at six
months, and in one out of ten, at three years.
Some baby-care experts teach that the
foreskin should never be retracted forcibly. As the child grows up, the
foreskin continues to change. It does not do so uniformly in all males,
and thus one finds a number of different types of adult foreskins. Thus,
there is the elongated foreskin which retains the shape of the infant
foreskin, protruding some little way beyond the
penis tip, but
nevertheless able to be pulled back easily to behind the rim. Most men
with this kind of foreskin habitually wear it fully forward and pull it
back only to wash, or during masturbation or lovemaking.
In other adult men, the foreskin shrinks
and in so doing exposes permanently about one half of the glans. If
it is pulled forward and then released, it will automatically slide back.
In others, it shrinks even further, so that the whole glans is
permanently uncovered. When attempts are made to pull it forward, it will
never cover more than half the glans. In the fourth, though
comparatively much smaller group, the foreskin disappears altogether.
Why circumcise at all, then, except in
those cases of elongated, unretractable foreskins which are giving
trouble? Appearance, maybe? If we are honest we have to admit that,
wonderful organs though they are, the penis and scrotum are unusual
looking objects. It seems to me from my observation of many scores of
penises that the foreskin which has been allowed to develop on its own,
though eventually totally and easily retractable, does have the effect of
preventing the glans from developing, in quite a large number of
cases, so that it never attains properly balanced proportions in
relationship with the rest of the penis. Often the head sits on the shaft
like a fairly small acorn perched on the end of a thick stick. I have
observed many of these, in my view, disproportionate glans on
uncircumcised penises, but not one on a circumcised penis. I know that I
share this visual appeal factor, not only with many men friends, but with
many women as well.
You will notice that so far I have not
mentioned either the psychological aspects of circumcision nor the more
controversial
physical effects that it is alleged to have on the penis
involved in lovemaking. Let's take the psychological and emotional aspects
first. Most of both circumcised and uncircumcised men accept their
penises, whether short of a foreskin or not, as a matter of course. It is
only when there are other psycho-sexual factors involved that circumcision
either becomes a mutilation or an obsessively desirable state. In the case
of the 'mutilation' complex, the reactions are fairly readily
comprehended, for though all males have a subconscious fear of mutilation
particularly castration this fear only surfaces when some problem in
sexual function concentrates the mind on the genitals. On the other hand,
there are some cases, though happily not many, of this obsessive fear
being kindled by a specific incident. For example, an old-fashioned parent
on catching a boy masturbating may exclaim, 'If I catch you doing that
again, I'll cut it off!' or 'If you don't stop doing that it will fall
off!' or 'If you keep doing that you'll go mad and it will have to be cut
off!' while in adulthood, feelings of inadequacy may be rationalized by
the man convincing himself that his partner is a kind of sexual vampire
intent on sucking him dry sexually, and eventually rendering him impotent
by removing his testicles or mutilating his penis. When genitals become a
phobic object, feelings of guilt increase in conjunction with a diffuse
anxiety which eventually results in the fear of women and the attempted
repression of all sexual temptation. In cases when circumcision becomes
mutilation, maybe what the man is really saying is that without the
protection of the foreskin, his penis is one hundred per cent vulnerable
to any attack the woman (any woman, all women) may direct against it.
The case of the uncircumcised developing an
obsessive desire to be circumcised is not so readily explained. This
obsession affects only a very small minority and the man often has
developed a deep conviction that the circumcised penis is a more reliable
lovemaking tool than an uncircumcised one, based on the idea that the
circumcised glans is less sensitive than the uncircumcised one, and
that this lower sensitivity enables the man to discover
how to last longer during sex, thus helping him to be a more
successful lover in all kinds of
sex positions.
When the circumcised man is troubled by the
mutilation complex, his only hope lies in psychotherapy. The uncircumcised man's obsessive desire to lose his
foreskin is much more easily appeased; there is no age at which a man
cannot be circumcised. If this simple operation is carried out, it is extremely
rare for the obsession not to disappear completely.
Insofar as
circumcision performed after the
age of, say, seven or eight gives rise to emotional disturbance, there is
a certain amount of evidence which shows that this can be a definite risk.
On the other hand it does seem to depend very much on two factors: the
fullest explanation, to the boy as to why the operation is necessary
coupled with the ability to assure him absolutely that he is not being
mutilated in any way, and that there are millions of other men who have
lost their foreskins; and that there are no post-operative complications
which give rise to a condition so painful that the operation becomes a
traumatic experience.
There is an argument that the loss of the
foreskin deprives the vital orgasm-producing nerves in the penis-tip of
their sensitivity.
An uncircumcised man believes his orgasm sensations are vastly superior to
a circumcised man's and that he can reach orgasm more easily during sex.
Conversely, the uncircumcised man believes that if he were circumcised he
would be able to hold back his orgasm longer and so be more successful as
a lover.
The circumcised man believes that his less
sensitive penis-tip nerves make him a superior lover. Conversely, the circumcised man believes
that because of his less sensitive penis-tip nerves he is being deprived
of the maximum sensual experience and he may have
delayed orgasm - also
called delayed ejaculation.
It does appear to be true, from the
evidence of men circumcised after they have had sexual experience, that
after a time the glans does lose some of its sensitivity. When one
comes to consider it, this lack of difference in sensitivity between the
uncircumcised and circumcised glans is logical. The proportion of
penises that are completely covered by the foreskin, which though
retractable is worn permanently forward is comparatively small, since the
majority of men seem to prefer to expose the glans for long periods
at a time. Even taking the naturally developed foreskin a study has
revealed that less than half (45 per cent) have foreskins that completely
cover the head of the relaxed penis, whereas in 32 per cent the foreskin
covered only half the head, and in 23 per cent did not cover it at all. I
have recently had the kind co-operation of one hundred uncircumcised men,
willing to reveal how
much their foreskin covered the penis head, of
whom 27 had foreskins which completely covered the glans. Of these 27
only 9 wore their foreskins permanently forward; the remaining I8
deliberately trained their foreskins to remain behind the rim. (It was
interesting to note that in these men, who had carried out this retractive
training since their late teens, the depth of the rim was pronounced. It
looked as though the constant 'hitching' of the bulky foreskin behind the
rim, had caused the rim to develop until it was capable of preventing the
foreskin from slipping forward.)
[ Non-erect penis size and shape ] [ Extremes of penis size and the retractile penis ] [ Erect penis size, shape & angle in pictures ] [ The foreskin & circumcision ] [ Penile shaft & glans variations ] [ Other penile variations ] [ From soft to erect in thirty seconds ] [ Hypospadias, Epispadias and Peyronie's disease ] [ Penis problems support groups ] [ The testicles, or testes, and scrotum in pictures ] [ Sexually transmitted diseases ] [ Penis size 1 ] [ Penis size 2 ] [ Penis size 3 ] [ Circumcision ] [ Circumcision 2 ] [ Masturbation ]
mtce2009 @ yahoo.com
(remove the spaces when emailing) |
