Accepting being circumcised

I'm sick of all these stupid posts that get nothing done.

I'm cut, I don't like it. How do I accept it?

Don't tell me all the advantages, don't tell me all the disadvantages.

Don't tell me to "just be happy that I have a penis that works."

Just tell me how to accept it and get on with my life.

Unfortunatly... that is something everyone has to figure out on their own... as there is no One-Size-Fits-All solution to being circumcised and loving it.

I personally... have just reached a point were that is me, it was a choice made for me at birth... and something I will probably for-ever have to live with...

Although I have looked into reversing it... not sure how well it will work though... I purchased the device from this site>> foreskin restore << and it seems to work some, the creator claims it worked for him... he has his story of using the device on that website... I can't say that I will ever look like I was never cut (or feel that way)... but in the 2 or so months that I've had the device in my possession... I have gained about 1/2 inch of forskin that I didn't have before (deffinitly not enough to cover my head like an uncut, but enough room to force it over the head when playing).

I don't know any other way except being cut. Do I wish I had of been cut? No. I would have perferred to have been the one who decided whether or not I get something chopped off my willy. Is there much I can do about it? Nope, so I don't worry about it.

If that magic pig bladder powder works to regrow soft tissue, then you may have your real foreskin back within a few years as if nothing had happened.

And sue the hospital and doctor to pay for it.

How did you ever accept having only two hands? How did you ever accept not being able to run at the speed of sound? How did you ever accept that you couldn't urinate a whole rainbow of colors?

I'm not being flippant here. You have no memories of urinating anything other than clear and yellow; you have no memories of having more than two hands; you have no memories of breaking the sound barrier at a track meet -- you've accepted these things, because it probably hasn't ever occurred to you not to accept them.

You have no memories of being uncircumcised. The only reason it's occurred to you to not accept circumcision is that some other guy has a foreskin, and you've decided to be jealous.

I don't validate jealousy. You can have your foreskin back when I get my hair back.

accept that if you weren't circumcised you wouldn't be who you are.

Accepting being circumsized or accepting your parents for allowing it? There's a whole load of stuff to get pissed at your parents about before this: why did mom and dad get divorced, why did dad drink so much, why didn't mom let me have ice cream that one time when I was 6? I don't think parents typically now put much thought into that decision, and they probably didn't as much as they do now when you were a child. Personally, I see benefits to being circumsized or uncircumsized, and it doesn't matter much to me one way or the other.

Get professional counseling like the other NOCIRC guys.

Usually, I prefer to go with what's more "natural" if the benefit of "artificial" alterations can't be demonstrated. That means not polluting the body directly with nasty cancer stick cigarettes, no ugly tattooing inks, no grotesque body piercings, and no shoddy experimental contraceptives. Let families grow naturally, unhindered by "birth control" or rhythm, possibly "traditionally very large," as many people still tend to and should prefer, for the greater good of the many.

But in the case of circumcism, I make an exception from "the natural," as male circumcism is Biblical and also the "American" thing to do. I consider it an "enhancement" actually, as a friend of my Dad's, as my Dad told me, was circumcised as an adult, and said it increased sensitivity. That then would be a very "good" thing, as it may encourage people to procreate more prolifically, so that all the more fellow human beings may experience life. If the world had any human race "reproductive urges" dial, that we could somehow adjust, good that God doesn't allow such unnatural manipulation BTW, then I would crank it up a bit more, to make things interesting and to help along human populations naturally burgeoning in size around the world. I have long thought that for "God's people," the Jews, Christians, or whoever might accept the "enhancement" of circumcism, it may be a bit like cranking up that dial, for the better natural ENLARGEMENT of the entire human race.

But is circumcism "natural?" Perhaps in some way, it might be, but it's an "artificial" alteration? Altering nature for human good, especially in traditional or proven or somewhat "natural" ways, is appropriate for such "intelligent" creatures as humans. Especially now that there's getting to be incredibly so many of us supposedly "crowding" the planet. But if circumcism doesn't seem so natural, then it's still natural to accept circumcism, after the fact, as trying to "correct" or undo a circumcism, may be detrimental or also "unnatural."

Here's another example. I have a birthmark, that my parents chose not to do anything to correct, leaving the choice to me when I get older. I also chose to just leave it natural, as it's on an area of my body, that shows only if I am in swimming trunks. Any T-shirt covers it up. What if my parents had had my birthmark "corrected?" Why should that bother me, as it probably would have went okay? I'm glad they didn't correct it, but if they had, why should that bother me either? It's most "natural" then, to leave it alone thereafter, regardless of the past. Then I never have to explain to anybody what that mark is. "Oh, it's just a natural birthmark, no big deal." I don't like tattoos, but I don't mind a birthmark, something like God's "natural tattoo" on me. Could be sort of "special?"

The decision was made for me at birth. I'm cut, and I don;t really care either way, I like it, because I don;t know anything else.

Your analogy is slightly off. Granted he has never pissed seven colours but he has never had the possibility to. It was entirely possible and indeed naturally intended that he and every male should have a foreskin.

I don't think the issue is that "some guy" has a foreskin and he doesn't. I think the issue is that all men are intended to have foreskins and his was forecibly removed without his consultation and indeed before he could have given any input on the subject.

This is a very sad thread. Try counselling? The sad reality is that your foreskin is gone and there's little you can do to get it back.

Macketeer, you've started two other threads about your coping problems:

• Foreskin Envy
• Circumcised solutions?

At this point, I'll will have to tell you LPSG can't help you.

I usually refrain from suggesting therapy and I don't think I've ever (when serious) suggested therapy to anyone at LPSG but I think that's about all I can suggest. Disclaimer: I've not had any psychological training and therefore I'm not qualified to give such advice [even though I did].

I'm not buying it.

Yes, it was "possible" that he could have kept his foreskin. It's also possible that he could have learned a foreign language, mastered a musical instrument, written a novel, and taken a CPR class. If people pursued what is genuinely possible with the same energy and vigor that they pursue this "waaah I was mutilated crap", they'd have the confidence and self-esteem that they're blaming on their foreskins instead. And the world would be a much brighter place for their efforts.

I also don't buy the "intent" argument. Saying that men were "intended" to be a certain way suggests an intender -- a big can of worms in itself! But even if you accept the existence of an intender, you're then making the argument that altering what is "natural" is somehow a violation of that intent. But based on your pictures, I'm able to tell that you trim your hair and your nails, thus altering the natural development of your body. Are you a hypocrite, or are you conflating the widespread cultural acceptance of short hair and trimmed nails with some unspoken divine intent?

It's clear to me that the issue is misplaced self-esteem. It's a variant of "if only I was taller", or "if only my dick were bigger", or "if only I looked like Brad Pitt"---blaming your lot in life on some trait that you can't change instead of working with what you've got. That's why he's going with the foreskin instead of the seven-color piss, so he can externalize his low self-esteem by comparing himself to other folks who do have the trait.

I agree with SLB about the possibility of it; I understand your analogies but find them a little off.

It's physically impossible to piss a rainbow, but physically possible to have a foreskin. Moreover, having a foreskin is the 'default' state of our penises.
For the comments about language, instruments and literature, yes he could have done all of those things - but they would be pursued, or chosen to be pursued, by his own power.

Without delving into the whole mutilation/inflicted schadenfreude aspect, circumcision - or RIC more specifically - is a decision which permanently alters the potential of a man's body (be it positive or negative) without their consent or consultation. I think that is often the problem people encounter, rather than the affects of what was changed themselves.

But it's done. That's the fundamental fact. And only a very small number of people who have been circumcised make any issue of it.
We choose our problems.
There is no wisdom in choosing a problem that has no solution.