It is commonly reported by circumcised men who non-surgically restore their foreskins that their penis lengthens by an inch on average. This is thought to occur because their circumcisions were so tight that their penises couldn’t fully extend when erect. The new foreskin that is created allows for the full extension that nature intended.
Also, it is commonly reported by these same men that the circumference of their penises increases by about an inch (no one has really come up with any obvious reason why this would be so, though).
I have to ask. . .
How do they do this?
Regarding the curve - The guy I am currently dating has a curved penis that bends toward his stomach so far that it almost touches. It hits “the spot” during sex, if you know what I mean. Why anyone would want to surgically correct the condition is beyond me.
Beating Arnold to the bunch again…the link to the column is http://www.straightdope.com/columns/001020.html
God I love doing that lol
>How do they do this? <
Diane,
Many methods are used by circumcised men to restore their foreskins. Most men use tape to just tug the remaining shaft skin forward over the period of perhaps two years. A new invention called the Tug-Ahoy is more convenient and involves no tape. It’s a painless procedure. All men who do this agree that the results are well worth the effort.
BTW, slight curvatures in a man’s penis can occur naturally with no ill affect. However, extreme curvatures are usually the result of badly performed circumcisions (I don’t mean to imply that there is any such a thing as a good circumcision, though. All circumcisions amputate the most erogenous part of the man’s penis. The very part needed to stimulate the woman effectively during coitus is amputated).
I’m uncircumcised, and it seems to me that my glans is a lot more sensitive than my foreskin. As for stimulating the woman, I fail to see how there would be any difference between a circumcised an uncircumcised penis.
What, pray, is a ‘Tug-ahoy’, and could a less ridiculous name for it not have been chosen?
I’m not sure what the foreskin is supposed to do for me either. I can see why the bloke would want to keep it, and I do think they’re kind of cute, but I don’t see what the foreskin does for the woman during coitus.
Diane…agreed on the curvature thing. My ex had one of those…damn, the only thing I miss about him. And from this woman’s perspective, no difference in circumsized/au naturel as to the sensory experience. Though I must say I think au naturel is cuter, the way it peeks out like a little turtle’s head. awww.
Chronos,
>I’m uncircumcised, and it seems to me that my glans is a lot more sensitive than my foreskin.<
Are you sure that you are intact? The only place on the body with fewer light-touch nerve receptors than the glans is the heel of the foot. The glans is a very primitive part of the penis capable of very little erotic sensation. Men who are unlucky enough to have been circumcised, but who are still lucky enough to have had a relatively kind circumcision, will almost always say that their frenulums are the most sensitive part of their penises. Generally speaking, intact men have so much sensation in the area of their penises that they don't know where precisely all of the sensation is coming from.
>As for stimulating the woman, I fail to see how there would be any difference between a circumcised [and]uncircumcised penis.<
The sensory component on the dorsal (top/back) of the penis seeks out small firm areas such as the G-spot and the clitoris. When this component contacts these areas in the woman it sends out a burst of a special sensation to the man. Of course, this causes the woman to simultaneously get a burst of sensation.
Also, a foreskin eliminates friction on the woman’s vagina. And, for various reasons, a woman doesn’t have to struggle to stay lubricated because there generally is no “wet spot” when she is engaging in coitus with an intact man.
Tansu,
>What, pray, is a ‘Tug-ahoy’, and could a less ridiculous name for it not have been chosen?<
The inventor of this device is named James Hoy. So, you see the play on words here. Those that carry out a restoration of their foreskins are usually very angry about what has happened to them (especially as they start to experience sensations that they have never felt before). They are very serious about getting something back that was forcibly taken from them. However, they often will say that “you gotta have a sense of humor if you’re going to do this thing.” The Tug-Ahoy is named in this vein, I’m sure.
If you must know, here is a DETAILED DESCRIPTION
OF HOW THE TUG AHOY© WORKS. Now I wish I didn’t know.
Geez, I’ve heard of “it” having a mind of its own, but this? How does the penis seek out the clitoris anyway? I’m assuming this is during intercourse, right?
Does it? Being concave, not convex, perhaps I’m not entitled to question. . .
I’m dubious–can you provides any cites for this?
Podkayne,
>How does the penis seek out the clitoris anyway? I’m assuming this is during intercourse, right?<
The main course of sex for an intact man who knows how to use his penis is not actually penetration. The main course is when the intact man slides the dorsal side of his penis over the clitoris of the woman. The man is getting the best sensations when he does this. In the process of doing this, the man is inadvertently manipulating the woman’s clitoral hood which gives her by far the best sensations (clitoral orgasm).
> Does it? Being concave, not convex, perhaps I’m not entitled to question. . . <
What are you asking exactly? The clitoris and the G-spot are convex. They both have a low profile, but they are convex. There is an area of about 1 square centimeter on the dorsal side of an intact man’s penis that is the primary area that contacts or otherwise benefits from the pressure of the clitoris or G-spot. This area is contained in a ridged system on the intact man’s penis.
> I’m dubious–can you provides any cites for this?<
What precisely do you want a cite for? All areas of the human body have been studied extensively with the exception of the foreskin. Unfortunately, there are many political, religious, and psychological reasons as to why the foreskin will not be studied in the well-funded peer-reviewed way that every thinking person would prefer (Certainly, by now, there is even enough published research to stop circumcision. Yet, American medical schools are still today teaching students to circumcised all infant boys.). There is some published research on the foreskin coming out of Europe, though. Anyway, for now, we are stuck with anecdotal evidence. But, IMHO, anecdotal evidence isn’t all that bad. One can still check to make sure that it is consistent with what is known for certain.
Sooooo. . . you don’t have a citation. . . Okey doke. Please don’t be offended then when I remain doubtful. There are more myths than truths about sexual anatomy, seems like. 
Podkayne,
>Sooooo. . . you don’t have a citation. . . Okey doke. Please don’t be offended then when I remain doubtful. There are more myths than truths about sexual anatomy, seems like.<
Maybe I have a cite and maybe I don’t. Exactly, what do you want a cite for?
I’m not offended by anyone who systematically doubts all that he hears. That impresses me, actually. If you are someone who systematically doubts everything that he hears, then I am very sad that you weren’t around when the doctors and religious leaders were inventing nonsense to justify circumcision.
As I have already explained, the problem that we face with regard to the foreskin is that there will not be extensive research done on the foreskin in our lifetimes because of the political, religious, and psychological repercussions. The shift is already on to slowly phase out circumcision in America. Circumcision is an issue that will be sidestepped for now by researchers who value their careers. An intact generation in the future will study the foreskin and then it will be fully known what the disaster was. It will be easy to face the disaster then because all circumcised men will be deceased.
Anyway, some research is happening. It does have some peer review even if all of the peers are not necessarily professional scientists. You would be wise to not forget that major scientific discoveries were made all of the time centuries ago by non-professionals. The same thing is happening now with the foreskin.
Yes, I am completely, totaly, 100% intact. When I was born, my mother decided that that was a decision my father would be better qualified to make, and my father decided that there was no reason to have me circumcised. I have just as much sensation in my foreskin as I do in the skin anywhere else on my body, but my glans is easily more sensitive than any other part except possibly my tongue (I’ve never done comparison trials between the two).
As for differences during copulation, surely you’re aware that the foreskin pulls back, producing the exact same profile as a circumcised penis? I can see how this might possibly reduce friction slightly, in the process of pulling back, but other than that, what difference could there be between a foreskin that is pulled back and one that is cut off?
The reason that we want a cite is that without one, it’s just your word versus everyone else’s. It’s nothing personal; if you stick around this board for a while, you’ll notice that people ask for cites for everything.
Mind you, I don’t have a problem with a person deciding not to be circumcised (I wouldn’t do it, myself), or to take measures to reverse a circumcision; I just doubt that the reasons you give are good ones.
Due to a medical problem I had as an adolescent I had to have surgery on my more sensitive member. I shan’t give any more background than that, save it might be disgusting to some, and is very private to me.
However, during the operation there was some irreversable damage done to my cavernosa. (I think that’s the correct term but correct me if I’m wrong.) What I’m refering to is the spongey tissue that runs up the shaft. Due to this damage, I’m afraid that my member will “never live up to it’s full potential”. At least that’s what my urologist told my father. This was a very hard topic for my father to explain to me, and an even harder one for me to grasp. I’ve spent many a night depressed as all hell about this, because I know what the average is (according to most of my RN cousin’s medical text-books), and I know I’m not anywhere close to being “average”.
Enough about me. What I want to know is, if anyone knows of any other types of penile enlargement practices besides those cited by Cecil. I doubt there’s anything else out there that I haven’t tried. But I can’t help but ask the smartest people I know. The dopers.
Just to give you a run down. I’ve tried stretching the skin, using a pump, pelvic floor exercises, blood flow exercises, herbal medicines, keeping in shape (I do that anyway), I stopped smoking because I thought it would help… Like I said, I tried everything.
But I would appreciate anything you could tell me. This is so hard for me. I just wanna be average. 
Thanks in advance to all of you. And thanks for taking the time to read this.
Jack Dean Tyler said
Let’s assume you are an Engineer(as your profile says).
If I were to offer an opinion on a matter of Engineering that is in your field of expertise, you might ask me to offer some proof as to my assertions.
[Jack’s employer] Jack! How did you come up with these calculations on the xxxxx project?[/Jack’s employer]
[Jack] Maybe I’ll tell you and maybe I won’t[/Jack]
Chronos,
>I have just as much sensation in my foreskin as I do in the skin anywhere else on my body, but my glans is easily more sensitive than any other part except possibly my tongue (I’ve never done comparison trials between the two). <
It sounds like there may be a problem with your penis.
> As for differences during copulation, surely you’re aware that the foreskin pulls back, producing the exact same profile as a circumcised penis? <
No, I wouldn’t agree with you. The foreskin remains attached under the meatus on an intact penis. Even if a man has a short foreskin, it still looks different than a circumcised penis if one takes a close look.
On your penis, it may be that you have no problem whatsoever. Or, it may be that your foreskin is too loose and you have keritinization (this is easily fixed). Or, it may be that your foreskin was prematurely retracted when you were a baby and your frenulum was snapped (this is quite common although I have never had the opportunity to observe one close up so I’m not sure what kind of nervous damage results. I would say that it is possible that a frenulum snap could result in catastrophic damage to the erotic nerves of the foreskin, though).
>I can see how this might possibly reduce friction slightly, in the process of pulling back, but other than that, what difference could there be between a foreskin that is pulled back and one that is cut off? <
There are a lot of differences. The main way that friction on the woman is reduced is that the stroke length of an intact man is something like ½" as opposed to a circumcised man whose stroke length is virtually his whole penis length (4 to 6 inches more or less). This shorter stroke causes the speed of the penis to decrease a lot. And, the shorter stroke length means that the penis changes directions before the foreskin has a chance to move on the woman. So, the woman experiences a rolling motion more than any sliding motion.
> The reason that we want a cite is that without one, it’s just your word versus everyone else’s. <
I'm sorry, let me rephrase my question: What information that I have given you do you want a cite for? I have a gazillion cites that I can offer. You should know that a lot of the information that I am giving you is cutting edge and so sometimes I can only offer cites that are consistent with the information that I have given you. That's the position that we are in, unfortunately.I don’t want to make a big flap here, and I realize you guys are going along at a good clip, and I don’t mean to cut you off. Just so this discussion is completely covered, I will mention that Cecil has previously discussed the circumcision debate. I mention it because it seems to be where this thread is headed.
Take a glans at it when you can.