Register Now!

Reversing That Circumcision Even Scarier Than You Thought

Posted by Brian Fairbanks

 

Details just published a harrowing and, admittedly, compulsively readable piece on guys who attempt to regain the penises they were given at birth.

We're talking about their uncircumcised penises, of course. Methods for rolling back the clock to the moment before the blade include surgery and foreskin-stretching products... and the results are surprisingly without side effects...

As a fitness trainer and former professional boxer, Jonathan understood that with patience and hard work the body can be transformed. So he went online and purchased a device called the TLC Tugger. Jonathan is now eight months into a two-to-four-year foreskin-stretching process using the device. He wears it around the clock—except when making love with his wife or going through airport security. He attaches it by placing one cone, which has a metal loop on the end, over the head of his penis; rolling his excess shaft skin over the cone; securing a second cone, with an opening at the top, snugly over that skin; attaching an elastic band to the loop; and finally strapping the band around his knee. The contraption, which pulls gently and steadily downward, has lengthened Jonathan's new "foreskin" so that it now extends halfway over the head of his penis. Millimeter by millimeter, he's re-creating what he was given at birth—and what was taken from him. He already feels like a new man. "I always thought my penis was totally sensitive and fine," he says. "It's one of those things—you can't know it until you know it. And I didn't know what I was missing." 

If we hadn't read testimonials like this in national magazines, we'd assume, as we do for all dick-altering products, that TLC Tugger and other foreskin-restoring products are total scams. But what if Jonathan is just feeling the effects of the device itself and that his skin actually hasn't been changed at all? And what about the guy who goes for the surgery? What happens to that crazy bastard?

Ben (his name has been changed), an electrician from Lynchburg, Virginia, from going under Reed's knife five years ago, at the age of 38. Ben had wanted to restore his foreskin ever since he was a teenager, when he became aware that his penis had not always been circumcised. Angry and disillusioned, he eagerly plunked down $7,600 to get his foreskin back. "It is impossible to re-create what was destroyed, but I'm happy with the surgery," he says.

For almost eight grand? You better be more than happy-- you better be a fucking porn star now to have earned that back. Would anyone out there plunk down that kind of cash for a slightly better sex life?

(Here's the whole Details story, by the way.)

 

Related:

You're Circumcised? Well, That Explains It...

While You Were Sleeping: Will Smith's Milestone

Baby Born With Extra Penis, Parents Have it Removed Why?

Don't Try This at Home: Penis Cream to Prevent the Transmission of HIV

The Most Physically Painful Movie Title Ever


+ DIGG + DEL.ICIO.US + REDDIT

Comments

Racer X said:

Those guys are a couple of dicks.

October 23, 2008 1:39 PM

Jews Against Circumcision said:

The USA is the only civilized nation on earth that  practices circumcision. Approximately 60% of babies here are still cut, but the numbers are slowly declining.

If people only knew what was involved. The foreskin on a newborn is attached to the glans in the same manner that your fingernails are attached to your fingertips. Imagine having your fingernails removed with pliers.

It is a crime to chop off body parts from another person. Circumcision is our national shame.

Let circumcision be a choice at 17 years of age. If it were, the practice would die a quick death.

October 23, 2008 1:54 PM

jenny said:

This is brutal.  I've been really glad about the awareness popping up (SO TO SPEAK) about how wretched circumcision is.  To be honest, I find cut penises to be very very gross.  And I'm not a wimp.  They just look raw and sore and unnatural.

October 23, 2008 2:46 PM

profrobert said:

Circumcision materially reduces the risk of HIV infection.  The data were so compelling, the study was stopped because it would have been unethical to continue to not inform subjects of the value of circumcision.  www.nytimes.com/.../14hiv.html

October 23, 2008 4:34 PM

Jews Against Circumcision said:

Foreskins do not cause HIV. Having sex with infected strangers causes HIV.

Europe has a far lower incidence rate in STDs and HIV than America, and no one over there is circumcized.

Sorry, to burst your bubble.

October 23, 2008 5:02 PM

profrobert said:

And I guess the Jews Against Circumcision are able to see into the future and predict which baby boys will have unprotected sex and which of their partners might be HIV positive.

Hey, are you like Jews For Jesus?  I always thought they were a lot like Democrats For Nixon.

October 23, 2008 6:26 PM

kdm said:

The Times article was from 2006.  Here's something more recent. The jury is still out as to whether circumcision can help prevent HIV infection. news.bbc.co.uk/.../7656229.stm

October 23, 2008 7:06 PM

profrobert said:

That's a legitimate criticism, KDM.  But note that the CDC study focused on gay men, while the African study was focused on heterosexual men.  So the JAC crystal ball also has to extend to identifying each infant boy in question as gay or straight.

October 23, 2008 9:43 PM

Jews Against Circumcision said:

Isn't the point obvious?

If you want to protect people against HIV, use education not genital mutilation.

Do we tell whites that they need to circumcise to fight against HIV? No we use education. But when it comes to Africans these people brush education aside as if it's doomed to be ineffectual and go for the circumcision.

There's some racism in that attitude.

What in the world do Jews for Jesus have to do with us?

Nothing.

October 23, 2008 9:57 PM

Daniel J Dwyer said:

Hey Jews Against Circumcision, since when are the vast majority of the nations on the continent of Africa, all of the Middle East and Central Asia, the west coast of the Adriatic, the islands of the South Pacific, Australia, Canada, and South Korea uncivilized?

If you're going to advocate against something, try not be such a bigoted asshole in the process.

October 23, 2008 11:49 PM

Jews Against Circumcision said:

Here comes the ad hominem.

October 24, 2008 3:18 AM

prodigal36d said:

circumcision helps reduce the transmission of hiv it does not prevent it. and doesnt israel do a lot of circumsizing? or isnt it an industrialized nation?

October 24, 2008 3:33 AM

Jews Against Circumcision said:

You have a choice: mutilate baby boys or teach them as adults to be selective about who they have sex with.

As pointed out earlier, Europe has a far lower incidence rate of STD and HIV than the USA.

It's racist to claim that Africans should adopt this barbaric practice because they can't be educated about safe sex.

October 24, 2008 2:40 PM

thegoodfairy said:

JAC:

You're the only person suggesting that circumcision is being used in place of educating people in Africa because "they can't be educated".  Perhaps we're doing a bit of transference?

as for the "ad hominem" attacks, watch your straw man, my friend.

October 30, 2008 8:13 PM

About Brian Fairbanks

Brian Fairbanks, the Senior National Political Correspondent for Hooksexup, is a filmmaker living in Brooklyn or New Orleans, depending on the season. He is a heavily-armed advocate of gun control.

in