Explaining the difference
Since being circumcised in mid-life, I often try to explain sympathetically the difference I am witnessing in being with and without a foreskin. However it seems women tend not to relate to a grown mans penis issue, and cut at birth men rarely want to listen. In thinking of alternative ways to describe it, I just realised I have in the past experienced a similar analogy that puts it in a different light.
10 years ago during an ear check up, the Dr asked me if I knew that I was deaf to a certain range of sound. I told him my hearing was fine and that his machine must be wrong. So he used a different test, and came up with the same result. Apparently, since I had never noticed the reduction in range of hearing, I probably had it since being a child, had gotten used to it and adapted as I grew up. Whilst I was shocked to hear it at the time, I put it to the back of my mind and basically closed it out. However the reality is that, whilst I enjoy listening to music etc, apparently I am not hearing all the noise that is being made. Since I have never heard it, it doesnt bother me. But I am missing out.
My love life now without a foreskin is similar. Without the full gliding motion of that skin over my sensitive gland, and without the sensors within the foreskin itself, I am not "hearing" as much as before in terms of sensations. Before I could feel all the great sounds, and still remember them well. Now the range of music I can choose to listen to is much less. I cant "hear" the masturbation movement as well (oral or manual), its physically not possible to be the same, and intercourse is destinctly more muffled. My lifelong partner has not changed, so its a direct before/after comparison taken virtually overnight.
My ear situation must be similar to those cut a birth. I never knew there was an issue of not knowing certain sounds, having got by fine without hearing those extra notes. Even when told, I just thought the Dr was wrong, and now kind of deny its a big deal. I dont miss the music I never heard and would have carried on just fine being none the wiser. Even now that I know I could enjoy music better, there is nothing that can be done about it.
So to those of you looking to cut your boy, please step back and look beyond the baby and think forward. By reducing his foreskins movement you will be reducing his range of "sexual hearing" in the future, forever, and you will be depriving him irreversably of being able to enjoy the full orchestra of love. Thats the way the puritans wanted it when they promoted the removal of foreskins, they realised how effective it is in reducing sinful pleasure to bare essentials.
I cant repair my hearing, I cant replace my foreskin, but I will continue to try to use my own experience to increase awareness of the reality of losing that little yet so precious piece of skin. Eardrums are tiny yet an important part of our senses, foreskins too. Nature developed these parts of our body for a functional reason, removing bits like them is simply disabling the full extent of our natural sensory awareness.
I hope this dual personal experience analogy is a helpful description. It has certainly helped me understand why cut at birth men look at me as if I come from Mars when I talk about it, just as I did when the ear Dr broke the lesser hearing news to me. And then go on to deny there is any disability. Afterall, nothing can be done once its gone.
Last edited by JLUK; 08-10-2015 at 11:05 AM.