Phimosis (overly tight foreskin) in 5.5 year old boy. Anyone got any advice - doctor pretty rubbish

[LadySnotAlot]

Hi,

I went to the doctors a while back with my son who had an infection in his penis. He is 5 1/2 and still can't pull his foreskin back over his penis. (Apparently this should be able to happen at about 2 or 3 years.)

The Doctors said to try and stretch the skin back over his penis (but there's so much skin we can't, and it's getting worse) and yet many websites say not to pull the skin back as it can cause tears.

Does anyone have any children that have suffered or had a circumcision etc?

Help v much appreciated.

To all the women wondering whether they should cut healthy sexual tissue responsible for great sexual pleasure off their sons ....

Ask yourself, would you do this to your daughter?

And you've just answered your question. Circumcision is male genital mutilation and is intended to destroy sexual pleasure.

My son had this when he was 7. He was screaming in pain when he went to the loo and it was coming out in drips. He had to be circumcised because attempts at stretching didn't work. He had an infection because he couldn't pee properly. We saw countless doctors who all agreed it needed done.

"My son had this when he was 7. He was screaming in pain when he went to the loo and it was coming out in drips. He had to be circumcised because attempts at stretching didn't work. He had an infection because he couldn't pee properly. We saw countless doctors who all agreed it needed done.
"

You were lied to. Circumcision is NEVER necessary for a tight foreskin. That is no excuse for excising the tissue almost exclusively responsible for sexual pleasure. Your boy is now permanently sexually crippled.

In a worst case scenario, a preputioplasty can be performed, which isn't sexually damaging. You and your son are victims of medical negligence.

The doctor should be sued and fired.

And flamineckpip,

It's most likely he got an infection from you trying to force his foreskin back like so many ignoramuses do. Foreskin does not cause infection. Stop spreading disinformation.

Lightf00t my husband was circumcised as a baby for reasons other than yours.

I can assure you he has plenty of sensation and is not 'sexually crippled.'

Your experience is just that - yours, not everyone's.

Oh, and CorporateRockWhore,

Your husband has no point of comparison. He has never experienced a foreskin and thus can't comment.

You cannot speak for your husband because you are a woman and do not own a penis.

There is basically no point in you speaking about this because you have zero knowledge.

The fact remains that circumcision is genital mutilation, is sexually damaging and is a human rights abuse no different from FGM. The only reason your husband isn't complaining is because he's never known any better. If I gave him his foreskin back, his mind would be blown. Sex is a stale, dull experience for him but he can't tell the difference because he's never known any difference.

Your husband is no different from all the African women who say they're happy that their clitorises were cut off in their pre-pubescent years. They have no point of comparison either.

I know you don't like to believe that sex isn't ' a mindblowing experience for your husband, but if he's circumcised it's simply not. Just like if you had your clitoris and clitoral hood cut off sex would be dramatically less enjoyable for you.

If you'd like to be educated more, reply and I can keep doing so.

Oh, massive sigh, can't be bothered reading all that. Clearly you've had sex with my husband a number of times as you know all about it.

He doesn't need a point of comparison to feel sensation; he has sensation, if you don't then that's different.

You need to calm the fuck down. Knife raped? You're an arsehole.

My husband was circumcised as a baby. We had a very fulfilling sex life.
The foreskin should not be pulled back. It will come back naturally. My son had an I retractable foreskin. He's 19 now and I assume no problems.
And vinaflynn I agree with you wholeheartedly
Ladysnot ..... Leave it alone.

"Oh, massive sigh, can't be bothered reading all that. Clearly you've had sex with my husband a number of times as you know all about it.

He doesn't need a point of comparison to feel sensation; he has sensation, if you don't then that's different.

You need to calm the fuck down. Knife raped? You're an arsehole."

You cannot have sensation with tissue you don't have anymore. If he has no ridged band and no frenular delta, he has little to no sensation. I am stating biological facts here. You cannot cut off sexual tissue almost solely responsible for sexual pleasure and miraculously still experience the same level of sexual pleasure.

Of course it's knife rape.

1. It's non-consensual.
2. It's an assault, not a medical procedure.
3. It's highly invasive.

How does that not fit the definition of rape.

You have called me an arsehole because I am speaking facts and you want to live in a dreamworld. I prefer to embrace reality.

By your logic, victims of FGM are perfectly sexually healthy.

"My husband was circumcised as a baby. We had a very fulfilling sex life."

You might have. He doesn't.

Jeez, you have massive issues. I'm leaving the thread now. And no, it's not because I'm in some sort of crazy denial about my husband being raped by a knife-wielding surgeon.

Bye.

Of course I have issues. I was genitally mutilated and had my sexual pleasure taken away from me. This is what circumcision does.

But you think I have issues because I tell the truth, not because I'm genitally mutilated.

Ergo, you are the one with the real issues.

My Dh was circumcised as a child and he has normal erectile function, lots of pleasure and a very fulfilling sex life, thank you...

Your opinion is yours, not necessarily everyone else's.

When dh was circumcised, his parents and doctor in the 1970s thought it was the best thing to do.

"My Dh was circumcised as a child and he has normal erectile function, lots of pleasure and a very fulfilling sex life, thank you..."

I can get erections, too, just with far greater difficulty due to the lack of erogenous tissue. Thus it's not normal, by definition.

How can you possibly know he gets lots of pleasure? How do you know it's very fulfilling?

You're stating scientific impossibilities here. You cannot have normal levels of sensation and pleasure when you've had your primary sexual organ cut off.

You have zero knowledge about the neurology of the foreskin and shouldn't be spewing nonsense. You are literally stating something that's scientifically not possible. It's like saying a woman who's had her glans clitoris cut off experiences 'normal sexual sensation'.

You women on here are in total denial. Your narcissism won't allow you to comprehend that your men don't experience anywhere near the level of sexual satisfaction you can due to being mutilated.

"When dh was circumcised, his parents and doctor in the 1970s thought it was the best thing to do."

Some rapists think their victims are asking for it. What's your point? Rape is still rape. Mutilation is still mutilation, regardless of the intent.

Jeez, light foot, because I'm having sex with him and because I can see it and he tells me so!!

You have obviously had a bad experience - but please don't scare everyone else on this thread as not everybody experiences what you have, and you shouldn't scare other people off. Circumcision is sometimes medically necessary.

"Circumcision is sometimes medically necessary."

Name a situation where it's medically necessary and I'll tell you if you're correct. Look at it as a fun game.

"because I'm having sex with him and because I can see it and he tells me so!!"

And you believe everything your husband tells you? I bet you believe him when he tells you your butt doesn't look fat in that new dress, too.

Your husband has no point of comparison. Him saying he likes sex isn't proof that circumcision is harmless, it's just proof that he likes getting naked with you and ejaculating. Again, you're oversimplifying male sexuality. He is lacking all of the erogenous tissue responsible for intense sexual pleasure. You are making scientifically impossible statements.

If I have sex with a woman who's had her clitoris and clitoral hood cut off and she says she enjoys sleeping with me, does that mean female genital mutilation doesn't cause severe sexual damage?

I shall wait for you by my living room window until you are ready to respond to that one.

I was actually finding this thread useful until Lightf00t took over

My ds is 3.7 and having problems with his foreskin stinging when he pees/just after. He's got some cream from the Dr, but the Dr (a Pakistani Muslim, for what it's worth) had already recommended circumcision before ds had dropped his undies. I note that the NHS website says this surgery is only carried out as a last resort, so have asked for a second opinion.

I'll now stop retracting ds's foreskin to apply the cream, and will let nature run its course.

Thanks for the useful info vinaflynn

Well, you ain't in bed with us, so I win on that one.

Plus, there ain't anything dh can do about it now, so what to do? Fret about his lost foreskin and erogenous pleasure, or just - er, get on with it??

And comparing medical circumcision to rape is just an insult to women who have been raped.

I was going to say the same - thus thread was v enlightening - we have a DS too, who has trouble retracting his foreskin - thanks for all the advice!

SlinkyB,

Everything I am saying is a fact. So if you really want to be educated, listen to what I, someone who's experienced being intact and circumcised, have to say.

The NHS seems to be getting better on this, but they still won't do what needs to be done--outlaw circumcision. There is no case of a tight foreskin that necessitates circumcision.

Cocktailqueen,

"And comparing medical circumcision to rape is just an insult to women who have been raped."

Circumcision isn't a therapeutic medical procedure, it is a barbaric religious and cultural act of sexual suppression that the Victorians adopted because they were prudes. They wanted to stop men and boys enjoying sex.

Genital mutilation is worse than sexual assault, you ignoramus. Removing the foreskin is irreversible so it's impossible to move on. Victims of sexual assault aren't irreversibly physically damaged. I would rather have been molested as a child than to have had all sexual sensation removed from me for life.

What's the point. You're one of those typically gynecocentric females who see sexual assault of women as the worst crime imaginable, but who cares about removing a boy's primary sexual tissue. Right?