Ninja Robot Kanin

What circumcision takes away
The foreskin is at the heart of male sexuality. Circumcision almost always results in a diminution of sexual sensitivity; largely because removing the foreskin cuts away the most nerve-rich part of the peni.s (up to 80% of the peni.s’s nerve endings reside in the foreskin) [1]. The following is amputated with circumcision:

-The Taylor “ridged band” the primary erogenous zone of the male body. This unique, highly specialized and exquisitely sensitive structure is equipped with soft ridges designed by nature to stimulate the female’s inner labia and G.-.spot during intercours.e
-The frenulum, the highly erogenous V-shaped tethering structure on the underside of the head of the peni.s
-20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types, which can feel slight variations in pressure and stretching, subtle changes in temperature, and fine gradations in texture
-Thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors called Meissner’s corpuscles, also found in fingertips.

Not only is a staggering amount of nerve tissue lost in circumcision, even further loss of sensation occurs in the glans after circumcision. Since circumcision deprives the glans of its protective mucous membrane, the glans dries out and is left unprotected against external abrasion. To shield itself from the pain and discomfort of abrasion, it keratinizes, forming a tough, harder outer surface that buries the nerve endings of the glans deeper under the surface and renders them less sensitive to touch. Studies now show, [2] as does the empirical evidence of men who undergo circumcision as adults, a reduction of sexual sensitivity in circumcised men, compared to their intact equivalents.

Most importantly, circumcision renders a peni.s dysfunctional. Circumcision removes 30 – 50% of the skin of the peni.s including the complex double layer of the foreskin, most of the nerve-endings (found on the foreskin), the mucosal inner lining of the foreskin, and part of, or even in some cases the entirety of, the frenulum. As one might expect after such a significant amputation, a peni.s subject to such interference cannot function normally ever again. Many adolescents circumcised at birth experience painfully tight skin upon erection, simply because there is not enough skin left after circumcision to allow proper expansion to occur. Furthermore, many circumcised men find their level of sexual sensitivity diminishes drastically as they age. Isn’t the foreskin a useless flap of skin? Not only is the foreskin integral to natural penile form and function, it is the primary sensory tissue of the peni.s that is half skin, half mucosal tissue, and all of the male G-.spot.

If circumcision is so terrible, then why do many doctors still perform or recommend circumcision?
It has to do with systemic ignorance with the human foreskin. Anatomy books throughout the 20th century described the foreskin in one sentence: "the prepuce covers the glans," in spite of groundbreaking research in the 1990s that undeniably demonstrates the highly erogenous qualities of HuFo. Urology books devote many pages to obscure infections, but circumcision is often granted only a paragraph or two, meaning the most popular surgery in the United States is granted only 4 sentences! (11) That is because circumcision is not medicine, it started as a blood sacrifice and continues to this day through misinformation, ignorance, subjective beauty standards, tradition and fear.

Even the very premise of this question is flawed. Not only would most doctors in the world never perform an involuntary circumcision, they are righteously appalled that a so-called "civilized" nation would perform this on their young. There is, however, a vocal minority of doctors in the US who vehemently defend and promote circumcision. The cultural biases of these doctors and their incessant need to justify their own circumcisions are painfully obvious to the objective observer and formally documented by an extensive panel of multi-national physicians. (12)

Some of the widespread myths that are used to justify circumcision:
It’s cleaner. It’s a useless piece of skin, It's aesthetically nicer, It's painless and quickly forgotten, Everyone does it, It reduces risk of cancer, It decreases the risk of STDs and HIV, It’s an important tool in the fight against AIDS, It is enlightening to realize that many of these myths are not similar, but identical to the justifications used to rationalize the excision of sexual tissue from females in parts of Africa.
HuFo puts to rest these ever-changing justifications for this millennia-old blood ritual, originally serving as a sacrificial rite, then later a deliberate and outspoken campaign to blunt male sexuality and deter masturbation. (1) (2)

The good news:
Some circumcised men can recover up to 80% of what they lost through foreskin restoration depending on the severity of their circumcision. The term "foreskin restoration" can refer to any method of recreating a facsimile of a foreskin (prepuce) to cover the head of the peni.s(the glans), for men who have lost their original foreskin due to circumcision. This can be done by surgical means, or non-surgically by gradual stretching (tissue expansion). Most resources on the Internet are focused on non-surgical restoration.

Despite the name "restoration", it is not possible to actually restore a lost foreskin. A natural foreskin contains specialized nerve endings, muscles and blood vessels that are necessary for normal sexual function and sensation. While to some degree these functions can be recreated, once the original tissue is cut off and thrown away, it can never be fully recovered. Nevertheless, foreskin restoration can greatly enhance the sexual experience, and will improve daily personal comfort. Restored men have reported feelings of wholeness, empowerment, and "taking back their bodies from the circumcisers." It is important that one begins foreskin restoration as early as possible for the best results and more time to enjoy their new foreskin. For more information on foreskin restoration visit: cirp.o r g/pages/restore. htm

Foreskin restoration has been known since ancient times, and is mentioned in the Bible. For more information on the history of foreskin restoration, see Uncircumcision: A Historical Review of Preputial Restoration - cirp.o r g /library/restoration/schultheiss. In the 20th century, doctors developed surgical procedures to reconstruct the foreskin, with varying degrees of success. Non-surgical foreskin restoration was reinvented in the late 1970s by a movement of circumcised men, mostly from the United States, who were upset at having been mutilated against their will. The United States at that time had (and still has) a very high rate of neonatal circumcision. See Uncircumcising: Undoing the Effects of an Ancient Practice in a Modern World for more information - cirp.o r g/library/restoration/bigelow1

No human foreskin has ever been regenerated by medical science. At best, foreskin restoration therapies can stretch the normal shaft skin left after circumcision to mimic the effect of a foreskin (see Current Therapies) but this never replaces the unique properties and functions of the real foreskin with which every baby boy is born.

Foregen is dedicated to changing that. Foregen’s mission is to harness biomedical knowledge on dermal regrowth to the field of genital reconstruction for circumcised men, and to produce a therapy which will bring back the original tissue, function, and structure destroyed at circumcision. Only when true foreskin regeneration is possible can the harms done by circumcision be reversed – and the benefits of being intact regained.
For more information: Foregen. o r g
shorturl. a t/djuP4