Problems after circumcision

[Andrew1958]

Since being circumcised my penis seems to have gone a lot smaller and I'm suffering from ED is anyone else having these problems

[Andrew1958]

I was getting morning woods at first week but not anymore or slightly hard nothing to have sex with can still come from masturbation

[Circedandlovingit]

The pre-circumcision size of your penis will come back. It's common for it to be a slightly smaller sometimes after the circumcision, but all penises get back to their normal size. Mine was a little smaller too for about 3 months, and then it gradually came back and now it looks larger than before the circumcision, so don't worry about it's size.

[Andrew1958 in reply to Circedandlovingit]

Thanks for the reassurance, when I'm feeling anxious. Rather than some negative responses I have had off other members. Thanks again

[At1012 in reply to Andrew1958]

You can always stretch the skin to expand it using foreskin restoration, until you have enough skin to reveal the full length of your penis:

restoringforeskin.org/publi...

[Hidden]

It may differ depending on when you are circumcised, but I don’t seem to have suffered after being circumcised as a baby. I am quite happy with my size. I had a second circumcision when I was 20 and my glans penis has got bigger since then. I posted a photo the other day if you want to see it. We had our sons circumcised when they were babies and their penises are pretty much the same size as mine (they are now 16 and 12) so I don’t think that circumcision decreases the penis size permanently.

[At1012]

I didn’t have enough skin for an erection, so in my case it is true, but as long as it’s done with care, there will be enough skin. This is why partial circumcision should be offered more as this would avoid the problem. Also in the worst case scenario you can expand the skin, which I am currently doing.

[Circedandlovingit]

Your fetish with foreskins is unique!

[At1012]

Doctor induced problem lol. This made me laugh haha

[At1012]

Thank You, I have been using Manuel methods for 4 months. It’s amazing to no longer have painful erections.

[At1012]

Unfortunately, me being circumcised was not my choice as my parents chose it for me when I was an infant. If had the choice I would have done a looser cut namely high and loose or possibly the frenulum preserving circumcision.

[At1012]

I am completely for partial circumcision to avoid excessive skin loss. There are a lot of health issues with being uncircumcised.

[At1012]

You are absolutely right. I was born Jewish, so being circumcised is necessary, but the biblical circumcision would have left my glans partially covered or at-least within reason. The foreskin restoration coverage index for the biblical circumcision would have been in the range of: ci-3 - ci-5, but most likely a ci-4, which would have been acceptable. This was the circumcision I wanted, but in my case my religious freedom to be jewish was also violated. The biblical circumcision was made more severe around 200 AD to discourage jewish men from restoring their foreskins. The most that should be done on an infant should be to cut off the redundant end that extends beyond the glans without touching the natural adhesion between the inner lining of the foreskin and the glans. This type of circumcision would likely amputate the ridged band entirely.

Since you are uncircumcised, what does the ridged band feel like? How do you think your penis would feel like minus the ridged band?

[Circedandlovingit in reply to At1012]

I have a loose circumcision with most of the inner foreskin and frenulum. Losing the ridged bands has improved the intensity of the orgasms, and they last longer too. My partner notices the change too and loves it.

[At1012 in reply to Circedandlovingit]

Very interesting, because the Bible specifically spoke about cutting off the hill of the foreskin, which is the ridge band. Your circumcision sounds closer to the biblical circumcision. So maybe the ridged band was a purposeful defect that G-D purposely put on a mans body.

Thank You for letting me know.

[Circedandlovingit in reply to At1012]

Our bodies seem to have many areas where things could have evolved in a better way. In the future we'll making many more modifications than removing an elastic piece of skin, that can sometimes cause problems.

[Hidden in reply to At1012]

The so called ridged band isn't a physical thing its just where the retracted skin is bunched up.

[At1012 in reply to Hidden]

Oh ok, some men talk about it as if it’s a really big deal to lose it.

[Hidden in reply to At1012]

Trust me it’s a myth, retracting a healthy foreskin is like pushing your sleeve up past your elbow. The crumpled material above the elbow may then look like a ridged band but you know it’s just sleeve bunched up.

[At1012 in reply to Hidden]

Thank You for the details

[Circedandlovingit in reply to At1012]

The intactivists and trolls here always make a big deal out of it. Even if the skin is kept by circumcising at the base of the penis, it still adds nothing to the sexual experience. It's just some useless extra skin.

[At1012 in reply to Circedandlovingit]

This makes me feel a lot better. I was looking at pictures and videos to understand a uncircumcised penis better. To me, it appears that the ridged band would just get in the way and tighten up , causing discomfort. It appears that under perfect circumstances, an uncircumcised penis can be great, but there is so much that can go wrong. Out of curiosity where would you place yourself on this coverage index chart for both flaccid state and erect state? Here is the website:

restoringforeskin.org/cover...

[Circedandlovingit in reply to At1012]

I was a CI-10 before getting circumcised. I'm about a CI-5 right now, but am considering a revision to a CL-3 in the future. Had the circumcision been a CL-4, I'd be less likely considering one.

[Hidden in reply to Circedandlovingit]

Well I think I’m definitely a CL-1!!!

[At1012 in reply to Hidden]

Makes sense, before I started restoring I was a CL-0. There is tight and then there is unbearable tightness lol.

[Hidden in reply to At1012]

Well I’m wondering if I’m a CL-0. That’s not shown on the site but it looks like the skin on my flaccid penis is tighter than the CL-1 shown.

[Circedandlovingit in reply to Hidden]

I like the appearance of a CI-1.

[At1012 in reply to Circedandlovingit]

That’s great, everyone will have different opinions as to what looks good to them for different reasons. But anything below a CI-1 is botched. This really needs to be used by surgeons and patients to get the circumcision the patient wants.

[At1012 in reply to Circedandlovingit]

Wow, very interesting. I feel like this chart could be helpful for men who are looking to get circumcised. When I look at all the coverage levels from 1 to 10, the most aesthetically pleasing to me is a CL-4. I love the look of having the corona covered while having the remainder of the glans completely exposed in the flaccid state. The erect photo also is perfect as it looks completely circumcised when it is erect. I could see why you feel that a CL-5 is to lose. I believe that I am currently in-between a CL-1 and CL-2. It would be a dream to restore my penis to a CL-4.

It looks like you like the CL-4 photos as much as I do lol. I wonder if you could do a revision to a CL-4. You can show the doctor what you want it to look like using that coverage index haha.

[Circedandlovingit in reply to At1012]

Being able to masturbate using the left over foreskin is the only reason for me to want a Cl-4 or CI-3 over a CI-1. I wonder if a CI-3 even allows enough skin to rub it over the glans.

[At1012 in reply to Circedandlovingit]

I am sorry, it is actually CI standing for coverage index lol, my mistake. It would really depend how much of a grower you are, but I recommend that if you are going to get circumcised again, to show the doctor the picture of a CI-4. Honestly the one difference between a CI-5 And a CI-4 is that a CI-5 definitely has enough skin mobility while erect, while a CI-4 may or may not, but a CI-3 would probably not have enough mobility to do it at all. Also a CI-4 would cover the neck of the penis while flaccid, which would allow your penis to lubricate naturally. When you masterbate how did being a CI-10 compare to a CI-5?

[Circedandlovingit in reply to At1012]

It's just as easy to masturbate being a CI-5, but the orgasms are more intense. With vaginal and oral sex, being a CI-5 is much better than being a CI-10.

[At1012 in reply to Circedandlovingit]

This makes sense because in your case, the sensitive areas of your penis were so covered at a CI-10. A CI-5 allows your penis more sensitivity because the sensitive areas are only partially uncovered, so for you it was an enhancement. A CI-10 looks really uncomfortable, it would feel like the foreskin would be in the way. I am thinking that at a CI-5, your sensitive glans is able to be exposed in the vagina, thus leading to more pleasure for you. Very interesting.

[Circedandlovingit in reply to At1012]

Sometimes the glans is completely exposed, other times only partially. Even before the circumcision I kept the foreskin retracted part of the time, so the glans doesn't really feel much different after the circumcision.

[At1012 in reply to Circedandlovingit]

Very interesting, if you are going to get a revision, I would make sure they only remove the outer skin.

[Circedandlovingit in reply to At1012]

Yes, only the skin higher up from the v-cut. It's all outer foreskin.

[At1012 in reply to Circedandlovingit]

Makes sense, do you have a post of your ventral side of your penis? It would be great if you could post it

[Hidden in reply to At1012]

I ended up being CI-5 before being circumcised and CI-2 since. I had shrinkage and redundancy assisted by frenectomy some 17 years beforehand.

[At1012 in reply to Hidden]

Very interesting, why did you have your frenulum removed? Was it a short frenulum? I am interested as I still have my frenulum, how did the frenulum have so much impact on shrinkage and redundancy ?

[Hidden in reply to At1012]

Dyspareunia. I grew up believing that because I could retract OK then everything was normal and didn’t realise I had a tight or short frenulum. Full retraction resulted in tension on the frenulum and pulled my glans downward. During intercourse it was painful during initial thrusts and then the foreskin would slide back and cover most of the glans again and stay there which was frustrating. I damaged it a few times and had minor tears but never snapped it completely.

The fren used to help return the foreskin to cover up the glans. So once it was removed there was nothing to keep the foreskin in place and unless I diligently tugged it forward would no longer fully cover the glans. I eventually ended up with about half coverage which I guess looked like a loose circumcision. I could wear it forward or back and often did as I found it healthier.

If you’re looking for advice about removal I’d say if it doesn’t cause problems then keep it and enjoy the extra sensitivity.

[At1012 in reply to Hidden]

I would never remove it under any circumstance lol. I have suffered enough with probably the tightest circumcision to still have the frenulum haha. I was just curious about your circumstances.

[masont8 in reply to Circedandlovingit]

Than if thats the case what were those studies done that says ridged band contains 20000 nerve endings bullshit,m

[Circedandlovingit in reply to masont8]

The study cited by the intactivists is considered to be flawed.

[Circedandlovingit]

I try to counter some the of anti-circumcision trolls here like you, whose posts are intended to make circumcised guys feel bad, and those recently cut think they made a bad decision. Also, guys considering getting circumcised, need to hear the positive side and it's benefits.

[At1012]

Thanks for the info.

[Circedandlovingit]

The ridged band had some touch sensitivity, but by having it removed the rest of my penis has taken over being more erogenous, mainly the glans and the corpus cavemosum. Those are the important areas, not the foreskin, and especially not the outer foreskin.

[Circedandlovingit]

I have doubts about that because everything radically improved for me.

[Circedandlovingit]

Most of the dissatisfaction with getting circumcised seems to happen in the first few months. After that, everything gets better by the day. From what I'm reading on this forum, most men who get circumcised are happy with the results early on.

[Hidden in reply to Circedandlovingit]

Well said. Circumcision isn’t going to be nice for a few weeks unless you’re lucky (like I was), but things get better, leading to satisfaction.

[Circedandlovingit in reply to Hidden]

Mine looked great right after the circumcision. I was expecting it to be bruised and discolored, but that didn't happen. No pain at all, and I felt great right after waking up. I actually enjoyed the experience, and was able to joke around with the staff, and have some good conversations with several of them.

[Hidden in reply to Circedandlovingit]

Yes I had no pain afterwards at all. I didn’t have much bruising either. But I am aware that it’s not always that simple.

[Hidden]

*invented by

(Fixed it for you)

[Hidden]

Your comment suggests that medical circumcision always causes a lot of damage to the penis. It quite clearly doesn’t always.

[At1012]

Yep, you are correct. It’s really sad that the circumcision style changed because tearing the inner lining of the foreskin from the glans actually goes against Judaism because the only way to reveal the glans completely is to rip the inner lining from the glans, which is incision. Incision completely goes against Judaism. I am jewish and I spoke to a very religious Jew who got very defensive. I said only milah should be done without Priah. I gave very sophisticated arguments proving that only milah should be done without Priah.

In actuality every circumcision is different, but the one I am referring to is no longer done, so you are correct. One thing I did realize is that the medical ones appear to remove less than the jewish ones. The problem is that if you break the adhesions and remove less, can cause adhesions and skin bridges, which is no better. Cutting off so much on a baby boy is the equivalent to playing Russian roulette. How can anyone know the measurements of a boys future penis in both its flaccid and erect states.

I know that you are uncircumcised. Where do you think you would fall on this foreskin coverage chart:

restoringforeskin.org/cover...

[Hidden]

I suppose it depends on your definition of damage. Removing something doesn’t necessarily damage it if it doesn’t make it worse. As far as I am concerned my penis has been improved by circumcision, not damaged.

[Hidden]

Thank you for being happy for me.

Just to confirm: I wasn’t circumcised for a medical reason and I still feel that I’ve benefited from it.

[Hidden]

Indeed, though I was first circumcised as a baby, and I think my parents were completely right to make that decision.

[Hidden]

Well I don’t and nor do my children.

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this.