Foreskin/Against Skin...?

[Gay]

I'm sure this has been discussed before somewhere. but yet another conversation with a friend has sparked off my curiosity.

Firstly, and this sounds ridiculous, which bit is ACTUALLY the foreskin? I've asked, researched and imagined it for many years but have never been given a definitive answer! :confused:

Throughout my teens, I always thought it was the bit that disappears into the hole, because it made sense that if that was cut, the skin wouldn't be held up.

And secondly, other than the cleanliness issue, is it really any better to have a cut cock than not? I watched a programme once regarding circumcision and it further enhanced my views that it is essentially barbaric :mad:

The whole "Oh its cleaner" argument is a load of tripe, because, lets face it, who here knows of someone who has been killed by cock rot?

I just think the whole thing is weird, and wonder quite often it really bloody matters...!

Opinions...?

Dan

x

[marshlander]

I'm sure this has been discussed before somewhere. but yet another conversation with a friend has sparked off my curiosity.

Yes, a few times

Firstly, and this sounds ridiculous, which bit is ACTUALLY the foreskin? I've asked, researched and imagined it for many years but have never been given a definitive answer! :confused:

Throughout my teens, I always thought it was the bit that disappears into the hole, because it made sense that if that was cut, the skin wouldn't be held up.

I think you are referring to the frenulum, sometimes known as the frenum (which is also defined as a strip of bristly skin that holds together the forewings and hindwings of certain moths during flight!). The foreskin is the skin that slides over the glans.

And secondly, other than the cleanliness issue, is it really any better to have a cut cock than not? I watched a programme once regarding circumcision and it further enhanced my views that it is essentially barbaric :mad:

The whole "Oh its cleaner" argument is a load of tripe, because, lets face it, who here knows of someone who has been killed by cock rot?

I just think the whole thing is weird, and wonder quite often it really bloody matters...!...

It absolutely "bloody matters". If there are sound medical reasons for performing a circumcision go ahead. If an adult decides, for whatever reason, that he wants to be circumcised, feel free. But any adult who decides that their son is going to be butchered for aesthetic, cultural, religious, hygiene or any other spurious reason that gets used is guilty of gross abuse. HOW DARE THEY? :mad: :mad: You are right, the practice is totally barbaric and should not be tolerated.

[princealbertofb]

I'd say the foreskin is all the skin that can cover the penis head and be retracted when you need your tool... it acts as a hood to protect it.

[fjp999]

I'd say the foreskin is all the skin that can cover the penis head and be retracted when you need your tool... it acts as a hood to protect it.

and when ya dont have it what isnt it protecting???

[Dan1089]

Haha,just amazed how offended you guys are circumcision.Here in the Western Cape Province,it's a cultural-MUST that Xhosa teenage boys get circumcised.Mind you,they don't do it in hospitals so no anaesthesia is used but they do it in the wild where they are segregated from their communities.Imagine having 18 year old foreskin being circumcised with no help from Western medicine.It must be bloody painful.

[Hyde]

and when ya dont have it what isnt it protecting???

The 'head' itself. This is why all 'cut' men lose some sensitivity in their 'head'. If a man whom has foreskin (myself for example), just touched his penis head without any spit/lube it actually hurts, whereas an uncut mans 'head' is continually rubbing against clothing etc etc, which if I was 'cut' tomorrow would more than likely cause agony.

[Shadow]

*shivers*

I agree with PA - I would describe the foreskin as the area of skin which extends to cover the glans, and which can be retracted when there is need.

Hyde is also completely correct - some nerve endings in the head of the penis die once you are circumcised which is why you don't have EXTREME discomfort in wearing pants and so on ... I tested it out once by pulling mine back and wearing pants - lasted about ... 2 minutes ? Felt like I'd been turned inside-out !!!!!

.

xx

!?!?! Shadow !?!?!

[princealbertofb]

It's difficult to explain to someone who was circumcized in their infancy what sort of sensation they are missing, like asking a person born blind to feel the sensations procured by eyesight. How could they know exactly what they are missing? But we could equate it with, for instance, imagining someone who used to have an arm and then loses it... The sensation ought to be there but it no longer is. However, I might point out that in cases of amputation it has been reported that those missing a limb could still actually feel the limb, when in fact it wasn't there any more. Now that's either strange or the brain has been programmed.

As Shadow put it, not having the foreskin would make the glans very sore, a thing which, circumcized men probably don't have so much as the soft mucous membrane will have developped some form of callousness. A bit like the fingers of a harpist fabricate horn after being so often sore and blistered...

[marshlander]

Haha,just amazed how offended you guys are circumcision.Here in the Western Cape Province,it's a cultural-MUST that Xhosa teenage boys get circumcised.Mind you,they don't do it in hospitals so no anaesthesia is used but they do it in the wild where they are segregated from their communities.Imagine having 18 year old foreskin being circumcised with no help from Western medicine.It must be bloody painful.

... and it isn't painful for innocent babies who clearly have no say in what is being done to their bodies? That kind of abuse doesn't just offend me it makes me angry. I'm amazed that so many people think it's okay to chop bits off babies for the sake of superstition or conformity!

The young Xhosa men to whom you refer probably feel as though they have little choice either. :confused:

[Smurlos]

The whole "Oh its cleaner" argument is a load of tripe, because, lets face it, who here knows of someone who has been killed by cock rot?

Precisely! If it were important that the foreskin not be there, why is it a natural occurence? mile: