Phimosis and getting rid of it.

I know a guy who had it snap. Texas chainsaw massacre time apparently. Oh how we laughed when he told us. A mixture of it being funny and leg crossingly worrying.:eek::) It only happened the once for him though. I knew another guy whose banjo needed a small operation because it was too short. His experience was that full circumcision was the default option from the docs he dealt with, but he read up on it and decided he didn't want to go down that route.

Listening to him got me thinking and I will admit I was quite anti circumcision, but people here on various threads changed some my thinking I must say and now I would be more in the middle.

I would still be anti in the sense that I wouldn't consider it the first option that it seems to be for many. It seems to be considered somehow not a big deal. Go straight to it without trying other options. If you have a banjo string issue I don't see why going for the full snip makes sense. Seems to be a bit like having a gangrenous finger and amputating the whole arm.

I would be of the opinion that a fully functional foreskin is an important part of the penile anatomy and preserving that must be a good thing. Of course fully functional is the important bit. If the phimosis is extreme and intractable or something like diabetes causes scarring to build up, then yes circumcision is obviously the best bet there.

I just feel it's sometimes jumped on too quickly in less extreme cases. minidazzler seems to have stretched it naturally to the point where it's getting more and more functional so removing it seems as a suggestion extreme.

As a slight aside and the medical chaps and chapesses would be the best bet for a professional explanation, why would stretching not work for more men with this? It seems the stretchiest(technical term:)) skin on the body to start with. I recall watching a programme about some of the early work on plastic surgery after WW1 and especially during WW2. Fascinating stuff and some medical serious minds applied themselves to it. One thing I recall was when patients who had extensive tissue damage(burns etc) and little enough good skin to harvest for transplant, the doctors inserted balloons basically under the good skin, which were inflated over time and the skin grew to a size suitable for harvesting. Now that's "normal" skin for want for a better word. So if that can grow and stretch why couldn't something along those lines be applied to the foreskin? I would imagine it's a slow process, but that may negate the need for circumcision in many men who weren't extreme. I don't know how it would be practically done, but I'd imagine if tomorrow circumcision was outlawed for some reason, then I'm sure someone would come up with a solution.

On a personal front, I have noticed in relationships where we were using condoms over time my foreskin became less mobile. Not phimotic(?:o) as such, but less mobile. Certainly I noticed this when I then went into a relationship where condoms weren't used, or when my existing girlfriend went on contraception. There was more motion applied to the skin of the oul chap overall, not just in the foreskin. Noticed it a little in the banjo string too. It took a few weeks I'd say for my skin to adapt, but adapt it did.