Altering Perceptions of the Foreskin
The mass circumcision campaigns of the past seem to have resulted in much ignorance about the foreskin and its versatile role in human sexuality. Dinformation about the foreskin would appear to be have been the rule in American medical literature, education, and practice. Up until very recently, American medical textbooks depicted the human penis, without explanation, as circumcised, as if it were so by nature. In current 21st Century United States the topic of circumcision generates heated debates whether or not to leave the foreskin intact or to circumcise it. Hygiene and cleanliness are given as the main reasons for it but there’s also the motive of maintaining tradition and conforming to social norms and not wanting to be stigmatised by deviating from those norm. And not forgetting that most important factor…MONEY… from which the Foreskin Industry profits handsomely from the neonate foreskins which have been and continue to be the ‘raw’ material for this industry. Thus, the promotion of the so called ‘benefits’ of circumcision continue to perpetuate as a way of maintaining the supply of neonate foreskins required by Bio Engineering and Cosmetics companies. Social anxieties arising from peer and family pressure can make confused or uncertain parents succumb and buckle to circumcising their infant boys. Many North American adults both male and female who have never seen an intact penis are likely to maintain the status quo when having a baby boy. The fear and hysteria generated by the pro-circumcision sector to the parents (particularly to the mothers) of new born boys needs to be challenged and reversed to dissipate parental fears through factual information, for a significant decrease in U.S circumcision rates.
Just what is it about the foreskin that causes many men and women to cringe, shriek and to be critical of the foreskin…especially if it has a lengthy acroposthion?
As an intricate and pleasure sensation producing structure, it ought to be seen as one of the most valued part of a man’s body. Certainly the decades of misinformation from the medical myths which dominated the English speaking circumcising nations previously mentioned caused the foreskin to be perceived negatively. However, there’s a gradual change that the status of the intact penis is finally being given recognition and validation after many years of anti-circumcision and pro-foreskin activism. The pattern of behaviour whereby individuals and groups continue “doing what we’ve always done” without question, needs to be challenged. Patterns of behaviour CAN be changed with new information and new ways of thinking can emerge when factual, rational and sensible discussions take place. The cutting off of foreskins seems irrational and illogical and those who hold the attitudes and beliefs that the foreskin is irrelevant, trivial and unnecessary need to be challenged. However, for a sizable percentage of humanity, the foreskin is ‘unacceptable’ on Religious and Cultural grounds. It seems that there’s very little that can be done to change cultural dogmas and religious orthodoxy due to entrenched and intractable belief systems. Still the hope remains that if facts about the foreskin’s pleasure potential are made explicit, then one can only hope that sense and rationality will eventually prevail and one parent’s decision not to circumcise may influence another parent not to do so and so on and so forth.
It’s important to both sexes that factual information and education is made available to promote awareness of the foreskin’s functions, purpose and most importantly of the potentially pleasurable and ecstatic sensations that reside within the folds of the Ridged Band. The beauty and aesthetic nature of the foreskin can have an emotionally charged impact on those men and women who value, treasure and revere it. The innocence and vulnerability of the human male seems all at once to be represented by his foreskin, especially the acroposthion. It would seem that it’s the acroposthion which generates remarks such as “gross” and “eewwh” as a lengthy foreskin seems to challenge conditioned views that an ‘exposed’ penis head is what penises are meant to look like. And yet, it is the acroposthion which has the potential to generate the most blissful enjoyment and pleasurable of sensations.
The fact that the word ‘uncut’ is predominantly used to refer to a man with a foreskin is indicative of how we’ve been conditioned to view circumcised penises as the norm. To refer to a man as ‘uncut’ implies that being ‘cut’ is normal and ‘uncut’ is a man who’s not ‘cut’, when the actual reality is that it’s the reverse that’s the norm. It’s very important to begin to change our perceptions of the penis from being uncut to being intact because being intact normalises the foreskin as being the integral part of the natural penis. Being intact is the way that nature intended and being cut is a man-made construct that ultimately desensitises the penis of the full range of potentially pleasurable sensations. Intact men need to take more pride in their foreskins (if they don’t already do so) and not to view it as an embarrassment nor shameful…and more importantly men who possess acroposthions should likewise not be shamed or embarrassed, but to take pride and not hide. There needs to be a revival of the ethos shown by the Ancient Greeks concerning the acroposthion, as it seemed to be a crucial part of the male physique. There’s no need to retract the foreskin to appear ‘normal’ in change rooms, at nudist facilities, saunas or in places where men can be naked. To redress the balance, intact men need to respect their foreskins, fear no more and not be shamed about possessing a foreskin or acroposthion. Intact men of the world display your ‘hoods’…proudly and prominently.
Sex taboo continues to permeate society through various routes generated from oppressive religious dogma and puritanical belief systems, which promote the suppression of sexual pleasure, including circumcision. It would seem that the general ignorance about sex has meant that the foreskin has been a casualty of this lack of awareness and misinformation. Derogatory terms mocking intact men and their foreskins have been numerous and names such as anteater, aardvark, lace curtain, turtleneck sweater, carrot (as opposed to mushroom), elephant’s trunk, snozzle have all been used to harass, bully and torment uncircumcised men usually by their ‘normalised’ circumcised peers or women who have likewise been conditioned. Being categorised as either a “roundhead” (circumcised) or “cavalier” (uncircumcised) was in the past how males were referred to in the United Kingdom in the pre-World War 2 era when circumcision was carried out largely by the upper classes and those with wealth. It’s yet another example of the ‘us’ vs ‘them’ mentality and another way which divides instead of uniting people.
The judgemental attitudes of some people can be incredibly negative, hostile, and damaging towards the owners of foreskins from prejudiced belief systems. Both men and women need to stop tormenting and body shaming intact men about their foreskins and acroposthions over agendas started so long ago, that all objectivity has since been lost. It’s also important for intact men to stand up for themselves if they are bullied or attacked for being intact. They need to turn the tables round and point out that they’re the ones with all of their ‘sensational’ equipment intact and that it’s those critical circumcised tormentors who are the ones missing out on the ecstatic pleasures that foreskins are capable of.
Jewish men don’t have any say in their circumcision, but there’s a relatively recent movement within the Jewish community to stop the circumcision of Jewish boys, which is generating opposition within the Jewish community, particularly from traditionalist Orthodox Jews. However, this is a very welcome start to challenging this practice within the religion, and it needs more support to deepen its roots, grow and establish a louder voice. This movement may prompt some other groups to review or re-assess this custom. The systematic cutting off of baby boys’ foreskins without consent can be seen to be a crime against humanity. There can surely be other less traumatising ways to welcome new members of a society into the flock than inflicting pain through the genital cutting of newborns. It’s estimated that up to a billion males around the world, or around a third of males don’t have a choice in the trauma of circumcision because it’s imposed onto them by their culture. It’s truly unfortunate that those males cannot be free to keep the most sensitive part of their penises.
The majority of men and women who do appreciate and value the wonders of the foreskin thankfully are predominant. China and India combined share a billion intact males between their countries. Europe, Asia (predominantly), South America and recently Australia (predominantly) leave penises intact, as nature intended. The overwhelming numbers must surely speak very loudly to those men who are considering having their foreskins removed because of the negative conditioning against the foreskin. Indeed, there are also many North American parents who are unsure about whether or not to circumcise their sons. The answer is don’t !…please reconsider and leave your sons INTACT. Men who are doubting the value of their foreskin, need to start sensitising them and not succumb to getting it cut off, because one it’s gone…it’s gone…and all those nerve endings are severed forever. Parents need to believe that preserving the genital integrity of their sons is one of the most important decisions that they can make, as it’s these sons who will become the next generation of adult men. They will surely appreciate the preservation of their natural inheritance and thank you for their fully functional arsenal of pleasure laden nerve endings which you left intact.