Search Our Site

Tuesday, 30 September 2014 02:31

Damaged by an Infant Circumcision Gone Right

This is going to be a VERY personal and controversial article. If you don't want to know the most intimate details of my life, and why I am so opposed to circumcision, DON'T READ any further!

You have been warned.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

When I say I was damaged by infant circumcision, I should be specific.

There wasn't anything immediately wrong with the genital cutting I was subjected to. No excess bleeding, no infection, nothing to indicate anything other than a “perfectly” circumcised penis. The doctor and thus my parents were quite happy with the immediate result. Frankly, other than a few hurtful comments about how short my penis appeared as a child, I didn't know any different.

Puberty changed everything.

You see, it is impossible to tell how much penile skin a baby will need when he grows up. His tiny penis isn't developed yet. Doctors have to guess how much of the mobile structure of the penis to destroy--they often guess wrong. The two most common late term complications include, the removal of too much skin (which happened to me), and removal of too little, causing other nasty complications.

Without enough slack skin, the bulk of my penis had been trapped my whole life; making my penis look shorter than it really was. With the onset of major growth during puberty, this became a problem. Growing, coupled with each and every erection I hadI was in tremendous amounts of pain.

At times, my penile skin literally split under the tension. With less than half the shaft skin I should have had, my growing penis had nowhere to go. At no time before puberty did anyone notice this, because let's face it, some kids are just less endowed than others. Really what parent or doctor is going to try to get a young child erect to see if he has enough skin? (No, thankfully nothing like that ever happened. That would have been a whole other level of child abuse!)

The growth and erections of my teen years left me with stretch marks and awful scarring. Until I was almost fifteen years old masturbation was actually an impossibility for me due to the tight skin. Oh, I would get just as horny as all the other boys, I just couldn't do anything about it because of the pain it caused me.

I never told my parents about any of this. Let's face it, teenage boys DO NOT talk to their parents about their penis or masturbation habits.

With no one to talk to about it, I logically assumed all my sexual problems were my own fault. I blamed myself for not being masculine enough. I blamed myself for being defective.

Twice before I was eighteen I tried to kill myself because of my perceived failings as a man. If I'd have had access to a gun, I wouldn't be here today.

When I finally had sex, I was disturbed to discover I just couldn't feel anything from my partner. Years of scarring and thickening of the skin left me with an insensitive member that wasn't equal to the task. The only way my penis could feel anything was during masturbation, and that was with a death grip that could crush full beer cans. While a vagina has some grip, it has nowhere near enough for me to have felt what I should have.

This led to years of depression, self blame, and a lot worse. I had to fake orgasms with women. Yes, I was the one doing the faking. (Maybe she was too.) It was devastating to my psyche. Eventually it was just too much work, and the relationships would break down due to a lack of intimacy.

I came across foreskin restoration a few years ago, and it was a purely cosmetic choice for myself. I had grown up around my intact cousins, and I always felt my penis was wrong looking. The idea of hiding my horrible scars under a fold of skin sounded intensely appealing.

Within the first few months of starting foreskin restoration I noticed a change. As I slowly developed more slack skin, my penis slowly began to heal for the first time since I'd started puberty. The more slack skin I had, the better things functioned.

By the time I developed enough slack skin to again cover the glans properly, I was sold.

When the skin covers the glans, the glans starts to heal and shed all the dry, thickened skin that has built up over the years. My sensitivity magnified a hundred fold. Also, shedding the thickened skin and healing the glans allowed the scaring around my meatus to soften. Pain I had had my entire life while urinating suddenly disappeared. That pain was so constant and expected, that I thought it was normal. My mind had become so accustomed to the pain that it no longer registered. Only when the pain was gone did I finally realize the levels I had dealt with. The sudden lack of a pain, that I had endured my entire life, was a true revelation.

Eventually I researched and discovered that I had been suffering from Meatal Stenosis. (Scarring and narrowing of the urinary opening.) At nearly 40 years of age, I was finally cured of it.

Foreskin restoration has reduced the look of my scars, improved the function of my penis, and improved my overall mental, physical, and sexual health. My restored foreskin is not as good as the original equipment left to rot in a medical waste bin in 1974, but it is SO much better than the alternative.

I have had enough foreskin now to know what both sides of circumcision feel like, and it is no contest. Foreskin is simply better in each and every way. There really is no excuse to remove a body part this valuable and functional without a medical reason.

My own parents, when I was a child, were just like all the pro-circumcision parents I try to educate today. They were convinced I was, “fine.” I was a happy child, and I didn't know any better. When asked, my parents were proud of their decision. They would recommend it to their friends because of how happy THEY were with the configuration of MY penis. My not knowing any different seemed all the permission they needed.

But they didn't know the reality. They never could, and never can. If you cut your sons, neither can YOU.

When I hear men brag about their penis, and claim, “I'm cut, and I'm fine,” I laugh, because I know the truth. The more insecure a man is about his penis, the more he'll lie and claim everything is fine. Everything is fantastic, “I am so very, very happy happy with my penis!” It is a lie, and an evasion. It is what men do to cope with their insecurities.

I know. I used to be the King of Denial. I used to say those very same things. It takes a VERY brave man to admit his penis is less than what it should be. I would have walked into burning buildings, or into a war zone without blinking, but to admit my penis was flawed was something I didn't have courage enough to admit.

I'm sorry to say, if you cut your child, you will probably never know the damages you have done. Boys and men are not wired to talk openly and honestly with their parents about this. A man will die before he lets anyone think there is anything wrong with his penis, or his masculinity.

You can claim all you want that your son is "FINE." However, you just can't and you will likely never know the actual truth. He may not be able to face the truth himself. More than anyone else, he will lie to himself.

There is no way to know how much skin a baby boy will require for his full grown penis. It is NOT something that can be predicted. Doctors have to guess. They can and do guess wrong more than they guess right. The truth is, your son needs all of what he is born with. No amount is the right amount to remove and destroy.

It took restoring my foreskin to finally make me admit out loud what had been wrong for so very long. Now, I brave the insults and ridicule I receive to spread education about the abomination that is genital cutting.

I speak out against genital cutting because I know first hand how horrible it really is. I know what the circumcised child is missing. I know what he can suffer. I know what you've put him at risk for. I've experienced it.

I've researched every aspect of it, and there is no excuse to take this pleasure away from another person.

Make no mistake, the foreskin is erogenous tissue. It is more pleasurable to have one than to NOT have one. It IS a valuable part of the penis. It is an organ with specialized functions that make a man's life better. Its loss is not insignificant. It is NOT just skin.

If you want more information about foreskin restoration please visit,

To future parents, don't just research circumcision. Research the foreskin.

If men wern't supposed to have foreskins they would not be born with them.

Published in Newborn Health



“The philosophies of one age have become the absurdities of the next.”
-Sir William Osler

It is now the year 3013, and in this report we will discuss briefly three rituals and behaviors of the tribes of people living in North America: the tribe of the United States collectively called “Americans,” and the tribe of Canada collectively called “Canadians”—during an era now called “Dark Age II”—1,000 years ago in the period between 1950-2050. As we’ll see in this report, Dark Age II was marked by extraordinary aberrations of nature and a reign of fear, exemplified in these three rituals/behaviors:

 • “Hiding” from the sun for fear of its evil intent to harm and kill
• Cutting off a portion of male infants’ penis at birth, called “circumcision,” to
   “prevent sickness and please the god”
• Ritualistic drugging and cutting in half of women to remove their babies, called
  “Caesarian-section,” to “save the mother and baby,” and the feeding of
   chemical powder rather than mother’s milk to newborns.



Through various forms of testing, scientists have now determined that the plague which struck these North American tribes (called “cancer” at the time) was caused by various activities of the tribe, including but not limited to: the extensive use of toxic chemicals (apparently known by many at the time to be toxic) in farming; processing of water and addition of by-product and waste chemicals like chlorine and fluoride); chemical agents in construction materials, cleaning products, and as by-products of energy generation; the alteration of animal and plant genes (for the purpose of patenting life and assuring ownership of all organisms by a select few); the accelerated growth and alteration of plants and food animals with chemicals with the intent to cause unusually high cravings and consumption by humans; and the complete reliance on medicine men (male and female) to “cure” the resulting ills—through the ingestion of various poisons and surgical removal of “bad organs.”

In a fascinating twist, the tribes were led to believe that the sun—which tribes of all millennia before and since have known to be the source of life on Earth—was the cause of the plague.

To “protect” themselves, chemicals toxic to humans and the general environment were spread or sprayed on the body to allow the tribe members to remain in the sun for periods of time longer than generations long before and since have known to be healthy. They believed that in doing so, they could “hide” from the “death-inflicting” sun.


Though this cult practice can be traced back a few thousand years before Dark Age II, it is surprising to our medical and anthropological communities today that the practice survived and thrived in the tribes of North America. We’ve traced the practice back to desert-wandering tribes at least 2,000 years earlier that used the practice as proof of commitment to or to appease their god (and could conceivably have roots in practices for hygiene in harsh climates), but continued in North America in religious and non-religious sub-tribes alike on the premise that it was “good hygiene.”

Male (only) newborns were strapped to a board—rendered unable to move or defend themselves. Then, during a dangerous and extremely painful procedure, they had the foreskin of their penis cut off—permanently damaging the penis and diminishing sexual pleasure for the grown man and his partners. Anthropological research shows that—in another shocking twist to this report—the parents of the victims requested and paid for the procedure, and then—most macabre—the medicine men sold the foreskins to factories for use in “skin creams” and other products to sell back to the tribe members.


What originated in the tribes as a positive advancement and an excellent practice— used only in extreme conditions where a mother and/or baby were at risk of death in childbirth (1-3% of all deliveries)—became a ritual practiced in 30-50% of the members of the North American tribes—and spread to other tribes and nations, reaching rates as high as 90% in some nations.

Where throughout all time and peoples, women gave birth either protected from the elements inside their dwellings or outside in nature (in fields or streams), attended by experienced women (called midwives), free of chemicals, free of machines and devices to contain them or limit their movement, and free of weapons and devices for cutting, the medicine men during Dark Age II persuaded the tribe members that childbirth was an illness. Thus women were transported to factories called “hospitals” (a word that can be traced to the 12th century, meaning “a shelter for the needy” and around the 15th century became known as “institution for sick people”) where every other sort of illness, injury, disease and emergency was treated—and countless, dangerous bacteria, viruses, and other infectious vectors existed and bred.

The women were given various chemicals to speed labor by strengthening contractions beyond normal (we have found evidence linking the term “Pitocin” to this activity), which made labor extremely painful, for which other drugs and painkillers were used—which in turn led to fetal stress and fear in the mother (further disturbing the natural flow of the labor process). The medicine men would then swiftly cut through the woman’s abdominal cavity and uterus to remove the baby.

Due to the intensity of the surgery, the affects on mother and baby of the drugs, and the removal of babies immediately from the mother (for the purpose of administering more chemicals), babies were often disoriented, confused (also referred to at the time with the phrase “drugged out”) and were unable to perform the most natural act in all mammalian offspring—to latch. After a brief period of trouble latching, the medicine men persuaded women that they were unable to provide for their offspring and offered chemical powders to the infants—bypassing the female mammal’s natural inclination and desire to care for her young with nature’s most nourishing and free food.

These discoveries are considered an enormous link in the search for an answer to why so many women during Dark Age II experienced postpartum depression (PPD) and postpartum psychosis (PPP).

Again, in a bizarre twist difficult to conceive now, many female members of the tribe came to believe that this method of “removing the baby” from the body was superior to the natural homo sapiens’ method of childbirth and often requested the expensive and dangerous procedure.


As with all bizarre tribal phenomena, it is impossible to know now exactly how these practices found widespread acceptance. We can only assume that the driving force behind them was a desire to build and maintain a powerbase for a select few tribal chiefs and medicine men.

Fortunately, the use of these macabre practices finally subsided—just as the use of the guillotine in the French and some German Tribes from the 17th century through the 20th century; the use of “torture” (which had different legal definitions in the United States Tribe from the definition of the larger tribe called the United Nations); gishiri cutting (the cutting off of female genitalia in many of the African tribes centuries earlier and through Dark Age II); the foot-binding of Chinese tribes beginning with the Song dynasty and ending in the 20th century; breast ironing practiced in Dark Age II by tribes of Cameroon (a practice of beating breast or using heated objects to make them stop growing); sati ceremonies (a practice of a recently widowed woman immolating herself on her husband’s funeral pyre) by various Indian tribes and banned before Dark Age II; and countless other tribal procedures and practices that flourished and faded into the annals of history. †

“Prediction is very hard to do. Especially about the future.”
-Physicist Niels Bohr


Photo used with license from 




*It will not come as a surprise that this is not actually a scientific report written in 3013, and it IS NOT medical advice and should not be used as such.

It’s a creative essay written in 2013--with respect for our individual needs and decisions--and IS NOT to be taken as a statement of fact or opinion of the author, publisher or distributor.

It IS what creative essays are: food for thought. And the process of thinking usually does one of two things: confirms us in our beliefs or challenges us to rethink—either way: a positive!

Published in Wives' Tales & Fun

Stay Notified

Keep up to date with changes and updates with newsletter via email . Contests, new articles and much more!