Foreskin 'toy'

Cock Wrangler Cock Wrangler
Only recently become aware of the potentials of foreskin--when a friend of mine described it as 'a secret built-in sex toy'. And wouldn't you know, someone went and designed a prosthetic foreskin for all the circumcision 'victims' out there. Would you wear it?
10/07/2008
  • Weekly Special; Buy 1 Vibe, get 1 FREE
  • Save 15% on Luxury Brands
  • Annual Clearance - Save 30%
  • Buy Cascade vibe and save 50% on lubricants!
  • Save 20% on self-lubricating Cascade vibe and sleeve kit
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
All promotions
Cock Wrangler Cock Wrangler
Quote:
Originally posted by Cock Wrangler
Only recently become aware of the potentials of foreskin--when a friend of mine described it as 'a secret built-in sex toy'. And wouldn't you know, someone went and designed a prosthetic foreskin for all the circumcision 'victims' ... More
Oops, that would be *I* at the beginning there.
10/07/2008
Beautiful Dreamer Beautiful Dreamer
I've never understood circumcision. It's not really medically necessary, so why on earth would you subject a child to that? Maybe there's something I'm not aware of, but it seems pretty horrendous. So far, in schooling, that is the only thing that I really have had a problem watching as far as emotions go. Rant over.
10/07/2008
Backseat Boohoo Backseat Boohoo
Quote:
Originally posted by Beautiful Dreamer
I've never understood circumcision. It's not really medically necessary, so why on earth would you subject a child to that? Maybe there's something I'm not aware of, but it seems pretty horrendous. So far, in schooling, that is the ... More
A lot of people circumcize their sons because of religious philosophies, medical theories about cleanliness, or because it's the norm. My mother had my twin brother circumcized because of the last two reasons, and my brother says he doesn't care either way "as long as it still works." =P
10/07/2008
Cock Wrangler Cock Wrangler
Quote:
Originally posted by Beautiful Dreamer
I've never understood circumcision. It's not really medically necessary, so why on earth would you subject a child to that? Maybe there's something I'm not aware of, but it seems pretty horrendous. So far, in schooling, that is the ... More
Religion, cleanliness issues, etc. There's no real practical reason for it; teaching young kids to clean properly is simple.
10/08/2008
Sleeping Dreamer Sleeping Dreamer
Also aesthetics. All in all it's preference, men later on in life sometimes have circumcisions done, it's not a rarity.
10/08/2008
BeeLeaveMe BeeLeaveMe
My husband hates the fact that he is circumcised. He also has visible scars from it. He swears up and down when we have kids we aren't going to do that to them. I am undecided. I have never been with a man that's uncircumcised but I have heard the cleanliness thing is a big issue. But when I was a little girl someone informed me to clean down there thoroughly, I guess you could do the same for boys.
10/10/2008
Dragon Dragon
This was a discussion when we first had children 13 years ago. I was essentially against circumcision. You can teach a child hygiene. Debate about urinary infections seem to be medically nill. If I'm remembering correctly, the American Academy of Pediatricians does NOT recommend it anymore.

However, at that time, and we were in rather progressive Eugene, OR. 50% of boys were still circumcised. 50% 13 years ago. There was a serious concern on the part of my husband about him looking different as he grew up and having to deal with the entire "male locker room" scenario.

My mom was a nurse. I attended a circumcision before as an aid. Child is not fed for something like 12 or 24 hours. This is a newborn. At the time- no pain medication, I don't know if that's changed. The thought was it was a relatively quick, pain free procedure. The Parents weren't there, but I can tell you one thing. The child was not amused. He didn't scream bloody murder, but he wasn't happy either.

We had girls... I wouldn't recommend circumcision. Not with everything I know.
10/14/2008
Beautiful Dreamer Beautiful Dreamer
Quote:
Originally posted by Dragon
This was a discussion when we first had children 13 years ago. I was essentially against circumcision. You can teach a child hygiene. Debate about urinary infections seem to be medically nill. If I'm remembering correctly, the American ... More
I only had 5 weeks in a maternity rotation. Infant's feeding schedules aren't interrupted. They get a sugar dipped pacifier now. I've seen one physician use a topical numbing agent. Most don't. All the ones I saw screamed bloody murder. It horrified me..... Just what I've witnessed. It may be different at various institutions.
10/14/2008
Sleeping Dreamer Sleeping Dreamer
When we had my son circumcised they did it in a different room. However, when they cut his tongue tie they did it in the same room right next to me, I'll never forget it.
10/15/2008
weaponx weaponx
I'm not circumcised and I've never had a girl complain. Actually I've had girls say that was the best sex ever, I don't understand why people are so paranoid about he male locker room scenario because honestly no one really cares. As long as you can use your tool right then everything is perfectly fine. I was taught to always clean it no matter what and what is an extra 5 minutes in the shower gonna hurt? I'm glad that sex feels different to me because I still have my 50 thousand nerve endings that I didn't get cut off. But circumcision is just completely informative topic someone can speak about because all you here is "theories". There is NO medical evidence that being uncircumcised is wrong or unhealthy. At least I can say I'm a "true man" and not a "modified man".
01/20/2009
CaptainBunnyKilla CaptainBunnyKilla
The religious reasons for circumcision are questionable for some people, that's clear. However, there's more to the cleanliness issue than just "less time in the shower". There have been well-controlled studies that have proven that the rate of HIV transmission is drastically lower in circumcised males (there was a recent study in Africa where the efficacy was upwards of 70%: that's ENORMOUS). There have also been studies that have proven the same for HPV.
So, you can take issue with the religious or the "cleanliness" rationale (you can always teach hygiene effectively), but I don't think it's fair to come down harshly on parents that decide to circumcise. There are a lot of factors, and it's important to take all of them into account before making any decision. However, there are quite good practical reasons for circumcision, both for the individual and for the community.
01/20/2009
tantric tantric
I was circumcised for no other reason than the my parent's belief of " thats the way things are done, and the Dr. thinks it's a good idea". I had quite upset about it and confronted both my parents on their choice. Neither one had put any though into until confronted them with my anger over it. It's illegal in america to do any sort of "female genital mutilation" to baby girls. I don't understand how or why it is not illegal to chop part of baby boys penis off. I'm not going to have surgery and most likely won't try those "artificial skins" I have been interested in the tugging method but as of yet have not found if the method if truly legit.

I think all the males like me should file a class action suit against those Dr.s/hospitals, We should receive a settlement for our "loss" and the emotional pain it has caused. I say only half joking,I really do treat my body like a temple, including external and internal care. I don't have any tats or piercings and I want my body left in tact, plus I feel like Im missing out on something.

sorry for the rant, this just really touches a nerve (pun intended),
01/20/2009
tantric tantric
Sorry for all the typos, I'm still half asleep.
01/20/2009
CaptainBunnyKilla CaptainBunnyKilla
I'm not necessarily advocating circumcision, and would never look down on anyone for being (un)circumcised or for their decision to circumcise their child or not. It's a truly terrible thing if you have been circumcised and regret the decision your parents made.

However, if we could avoid comparisons of FGM to circumcision on this thread and elsewhere, I'd really appreciate it. FGM is a brutal process that is done with the specific intent of ruining any and all sexual pleasure a woman might ever have in her life. It is done to exert male control over women's bodies and to take away their personal agency.

Male circumcision does not carry with it the power issues or the complete destruction of any ability AT ALL to feel sexual pleasure. They are not parallel procedures, if FGM can be called a "procedure" at all.
01/20/2009
weaponx weaponx
Quote:
Originally posted by CaptainBunnyKilla
I'm not necessarily advocating circumcision, and would never look down on anyone for being (un)circumcised or for their decision to circumcise their child or not. It's a truly terrible thing if you have been circumcised and regret the ... More
Just to let you know from both posts you posted. HIV anyone can get either if you are circumcised or non. If you wear a condom you'll be fine and if you don't go out and screw everything with a "hole" you'll be fine. In very simply terms.

HIV is a disease of people just messing around and not taking full safety precautions.

Also. Circumcision does lower the sensitivity of a male. Like FGM does for a female. You lose 50,000 nerve ending which means you lose a lot of feeling so you can't enjoy it like non circumcised people can.

Either way. It should be in America where the parent teaches the kid to clean properly until they get older and they can make the discussion them self to either cut it off or not.

Look at all a lot of other countries Europe doesn't do much circumcision and I don't see them women complaining about anything.

There was a study done that women who have slept with an uncircumcised man sex was a lot better.
01/20/2009
weaponx weaponx
Wanted to add to my post above. I read your MSN article and if you really think about it.

You take an circumcised man and have him sleep with an infected women. And you have an non circumcised man sleep with an infected women they BOTH are infected. So really that study really doesn't prove anything except you have to choose the right partner and use condoms to protect your self.

Anyone can get infected circumcised or not.
01/20/2009
CaptainBunnyKilla CaptainBunnyKilla
Quote:
Originally posted by weaponx
Wanted to add to my post above. I read your MSN article and if you really think about it.

You take an circumcised man and have him sleep with an infected women. And you have an non circumcised man sleep with an infected women they BOTH are ... More
Two things: first, the study proves that for unprotected sex, a male is 70% less likely to contract HIV through heterosexual sex. So, no: seven out of ten cases, the unprotected circumcised man does NOT become infected. Your characterization of HIV as "a disease of people just messing around and not taking full safety precautions" is a gross oversimplification and deserves no further comment from me. I'm frankly surprised to see that on a sex-positive site.

Second: it's extremely offensive and ignorant to claim that FGM and male circumcision are even remotely in the same category. Read up on FGM.
01/20/2009
Oggins Oggins
I think it's just a matter of preference. I do feel sorry for those who have lost a considerable amount of sensation from a circumcision but, I also feel that the circumcision is only as good as the doctor who is doing it. I can't help but wonder on the cases where there is alot of scaring how that scaring got there. It would be very interesting and informative if there was someone who had chosen to be circumcised later in life could explain to us what for them has changed but, I do not know anyone.

I have to agree totally with Toygirl that FGM is something totally different and in fact is used as a torture. That is all...... I don't know of any woman willingly requesting FGM so, it is definitely not the same thing by any means!
01/20/2009
Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme) Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme)
Quote:
Originally posted by CaptainBunnyKilla
Two things: first, the study proves that for unprotected sex, a male is 70% less likely to contract HIV through heterosexual sex. So, no: seven out of ten cases, the unprotected circumcised man does NOT become infected. Your characterization of HIV ... More
I find the claim that they're NOT related pretty offensive. I think the institutionalized mutilation of infant's penises is one of America's darkest 'open' secrets. All thanks to a nutjob called Kellogg, who claimed it reduced the frequency of masturbation.

Kids in the third world have their foreskins hacked off with rocks and rusty metal. An infant in Brooklyn died of Herpes, contracted from the Rabbi who performed his circumcision.

It's a brutal, backwards tradition that no informed parent would willingly put their kid through. Unfortunately, there's so much misinformation out there that many parents just 'do it' so their kids will have a penis resembling their father's.

In the western world, where we have access to water and education, the so-called 'benefits' of circumcision are disproportionate to the risks of the procedure (I prefer the term 'mutilation.')
01/20/2009
Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme) Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme)
Hmmm. Sorry if I sounded so forthright then - it's just a topic I feel VERY strongly about.

Of course FGM is WORSE than male circumcision - but they're definitely related and because one is worse than the other doesn't make either of them acceptable.

I think an adult deciding to get circumcised is FINE. I've known two and they walked like they'd been kicked in the nuts for three weeks afterwards. However, it's no different than splitting your tongue or getting a piercing - it's consensual body modification.

However, performing the operation on an unwilling infant, without anesthetic, is just cruel and disgusting. Sure, kids don't remember having the operation done when they grow up. That doesn't mean it's not HORRIBLY painful and traumatic.

Plus, circumcisions go wrong all the time. Just look at that kid in Canada, who had his penis 'lasered' off during circumcision. My wife's former boyfriend had a botched circumcision and thirty years later, still had painful scars and welts and the foreskin was never quite detached from the glans.

WHY do it? It's totally needless.
01/20/2009
CaptainBunnyKilla CaptainBunnyKilla
Quote:
Originally posted by Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme)
Hmmm. Sorry if I sounded so forthright then - it's just a topic I feel VERY strongly about.

Of course FGM is WORSE than male circumcision - but they're definitely related and because one is worse than the other doesn't make either ... More
I don't want to sound like I'm advocating circumcision: I just want people to be aware that there are concrete disease-prevention reasons that people might choose to circumcise. The scientists in the study I linked above had to stop the study months early because the results were so overwhelmingly clear: they could not ethically continue the study without offering every single participant circumcision because it was so effective at preventing HIV transmission. In a perfect world, no one would have to worry about HIV transmission. As it stands, parents should not be demonized or made to feel ashamed of their decision if they have their son circumcised to prevent infection (this holds especially for people in Africa since infection rates are so high). Obviously, the lower the individual infection rate, the less the community needs to worry. It's a herd phenomenon and I think it's perfectly reasonable justification. People will make whatever decision they make, but they should have all the facts.

I do take issue, however with saying that make circumcision and FGM are even related: they are similar in that both involve genital regions. The similarities end there. The motivations are completely different: male circumcision is often motivated by tradition, aesthetics, and health concerns. It does not (when not botched) result in long-term crippling of sexual function. FGM is motivated by a desire to control the sexuality of the victim, to make it impossible for that victim to have sexual agency, and to express ownership over that victim. It's apples and oranges.
01/20/2009
Oggins Oggins
Quote:
Originally posted by Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme)
Hmmm. Sorry if I sounded so forthright then - it's just a topic I feel VERY strongly about.

Of course FGM is WORSE than male circumcision - but they're definitely related and because one is worse than the other doesn't make either ... More
Red Roulette, there is no need to apologize for feeling strongly about something you believe in at all! I've taken no offense and I doubt that anyone else has either. I actually love to see someone that so strongly supports their beliefs. No, I don't expect everyone to have the same beliefs and, that would not make for an interesting conversation..... Those are all very tragic stories but, there are tragic stories to all types of procedures also. I feel if someone chooses to have it done, they make that decision knowing everything that could happen and that's their choice. As far as circumcising a newborn...I'm not so sure what to think really. Yes, they might grow up and hate their parents for having it done but, the could also turn around and hate them for not having it done so, I don't know. It could go both ways.... I don't think a parent is wrong for choosing to have it done and I don't think they are wrong for not doing it. It's just their personal choice I guess.
01/20/2009
Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme) Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme)
Quote:
Originally posted by CaptainBunnyKilla
I don't want to sound like I'm advocating circumcision: I just want people to be aware that there are concrete disease-prevention reasons that people might choose to circumcise. The scientists in the study I linked above had to stop the ... More
I will agree that the situation in Africa is DEFINITELY different to the situation here.

In the western world, the 'benefits' of circumcision compared to the risks are negligible. So why do it?

And listen, I don't want to offend you, but I TOTALLY disagree with you on the subject of FGM and you'll find I'm not alone. Certainly, male circumcision isn't nearly as severe, but even WHO workers in Africa acknowledge that they're related.

This is the transcript of a radio interview with Dr. Nahid Toubia, physician and director of Research Arction Information Network for the Bodily Integrity of Women:

Maureen Primerana asked: "I understand that in the communities where female genital mutilation occurs, it is often referred to as female circumcision, however, this term implies an analogy with male circumcision, which is not the case. Could you explain the difference?"

Dr NahidToubia replied: "Well, I disagree with you that it's not the case. I think the people who say that there are no similarities are people who don't want to address male circumcision basically. Number one, they're done as a ritual. It's not done to mutilate anybody. It's done as a positive cultural ritual even though it creates damage. But the intent of it is something to keep the child part of the community, part of their peer group, part of an ancestral ritual that's based on culture, sometimes in a misperception, sometimes some people feel it's based on religion. So in that sense, it's not that different from male circumcision. And many of the societies that do female circumcision actually do male circumcision around the same time. They don't see this difference. The other similarity, I think, is the fact that it's done on a child without the child's consent. Now, regardless of the degree of damage, I think any physical cutting of a child, to our understanding today in the 1990s is a human rights violation of that child.
01/20/2009
CaptainBunnyKilla CaptainBunnyKilla
Quote:
Originally posted by Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme)
I will agree that the situation in Africa is DEFINITELY different to the situation here.

In the western world, the 'benefits' of circumcision compared to the risks are negligible. So why do it?

And listen, I don't want to ... More
FGM does, in fact, mutilate. To show this let's run through what male circumcision would look like if it were parallel to FGM:

The frenulum (which I'm using here as a substitute for the clitoris) would be cut off entirely so as to eliminate any pleasurable sexual feelings for the remainder of the victim's life. The opening of the penis would be sewn shut. The thread holding the opening shut would be periodically cut open whenever someone in control of this male decided they would allow the male to ejaculate. Then it would be sewn shut again. The male in question would have no control over when or if any of this would be happening. The male in question would be permanently unable to feel sexual pleasure, or control their sexuality at all.
This process would be done entirely without anaesthetic with high risk of reinfection any time opening is opened and sewn shut again.

FGM and male circumcision are not parallel. Anthropologically speaking, the culture might wish to believe they are, but they're objectively not. Like I said, this largely comes down to issues of power and control.
01/20/2009
CaptainBunnyKilla CaptainBunnyKilla
Quote:
Originally posted by Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme)
I will agree that the situation in Africa is DEFINITELY different to the situation here.

In the western world, the 'benefits' of circumcision compared to the risks are negligible. So why do it?

And listen, I don't want to ... More
Oh, and rates of HIV transmission in homosexual and minority communities in this country are quite high. It's not as though there's no potential benefit.

Male circumcision has also been shown to reduce the rate of transmission of HPV, which is prevalent in the western world.

Again, I'm saying, make your own decisions, but it's not like there are no reasons to circumcise. It's not a foregone conclusion.
01/20/2009
CaptainBunnyKilla CaptainBunnyKilla
Quote:
Originally posted by Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme)
I will agree that the situation in Africa is DEFINITELY different to the situation here.

In the western world, the 'benefits' of circumcision compared to the risks are negligible. So why do it?

And listen, I don't want to ... More
Oh, and rates of HIV transmission in homosexual and minority communities in this country are quite high. It's not as though there's no potential benefit.

Male circumcision has also been shown to reduce the rate of transmission of HPV, which is prevalent in the western world.

Again, I'm saying, make your own decisions, but it's not like there are no reasons to circumcise. It's not a foregone conclusion.
01/20/2009
Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme) Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme)
You wrote: "The male in question would have no control over when or if any of this would be happening."

Kind of, erm, EXACTLY like circumcising as infant.

You wrote: "FGM and male circumcision are not parallel."

Ah! I never said they were parallel. I said they were RELATED. Like chopping off somebody's arm is worse than chopping off somebody's pinky finger. Either way you look at it, it's still unlawful amputation.

The situation in Africa is just barbaric and it's difficult to compare the two because what happens to those poor girls is SO horrific. But remember, Dr Kellog, the man who popularized male circumcision in America, recommended dabbing a female child's clitoris with acid to burn and desensitize it.
01/20/2009
Avery Dragon Avery Dragon
I know this has little to do with the way the discussion is turning out, but I know that there is a large portion of men that have been circumcised as children, and are looking to have the norm change, so circumcision is done by choice as an adult, rather than done when born. My boyfriend is not part of the organization, however he does wish to be back in his natural state, not able to be truly natural again, he is undergoing foreskin restoration, to be as close to original as possible. so far he is having good results, the skin is slowly beginning to stretch back over his glans. Depending on how it comes out, i may undergo the stretching process as well.
01/20/2009
CaptainBunnyKilla CaptainBunnyKilla
Quote:
Originally posted by Champagne and Benzedrine (Roland Hulme)
You wrote: "The male in question would have no control over when or if any of this would be happening."

Kind of, erm, EXACTLY like circumcising as infant.

You wrote: "FGM and male circumcision are not ... More
I did say in an earlier post that they were similar in that both involve genital regions.

True that the infant male has no control, but women subject to FGM are continuously victimized, repeatedly during their adult lives. Their sexuality is actively controlled by other people. There's a concrete social difference between being a male (and therefore in a high social standing) and being female (and by default in lower social standing in most parts of the world). With these social differences come differences in treatment.

I'm not actually sure why you're trying to draw such a strong connection between FGM and male circumcision in the first place. All I know is that whenever FGM is discussed, men always come out of the woodwork to proclaim loudly why male circumcision is just as bad and just as big of a problem. It's objectively NOT.
01/20/2009
Total posts: 70
Unique posters: 30