Ouch, it would seem.
A man nearly lost part of his penis after pubic hair got caught around his tip and cut off its blood supply.
Brings tears to the eyes. So we had better all watch out, then?
Medics claim the uncircumcised man’s ordeal — which has left him with a deformed member — could have been avoided if he washed properly.
The 57-year-old, who wasn’t named, ‘rarely’ retracted his foreskin to clean, according to the Australian urologists who treated him.
He also urinated sitting down, meaning that the build-up of hair that collected under his foreskin went unnoticed.
Surgeons described the hairs as being ‘matted together’ and having formed a ‘tight ring’ under his glans — the head of the penis.
Okay, nothing to worry about after all. But some people, eh? Went unnoticed? Bloody Hell.
This is why I prefer circumcised men – good hygiene is so much easier to accomplish/maintain. I know, I know, as a woman, I’m not supposed to have an opinion on that, but there you have it.
This story is making my OCD go all kinds of crazy – bad hygiene was actually a health hazard rather than just a source of stink. I had no idea that much hair could grow in that particular spot!
I am vigorously opposed to circumcision for anything other than health reasons. There is no excuse for poor personal hygiene and it really is a simple matter. I certainly have no difficulty and I would never get part of my body removed because I was too idle to clean myself properly. This man didn’t have a problem because he wasn’t circumcised, he had a problem because he was a dirty bastard.
You are entitled to an opinion, but you are not entitled to expect a man to have part of his body removed to satisfy it any more than a woman should expect to alter her body to suit a man’s preferences.
Blimey LR, she touched a nerve there didn’t she…….
Dunno about that. The idea of removing a part of one’s body to satisfy someone else’s preferences is pretty repugnant.
If an adult wishes to have the procedure, then fine. Up to them, but I certainly wouldn’t and I’d walk away from any woman that insisted on it.
That was quite a response to someone giving you their personal opinion – as far as I can tell, she wasn’t mandating it. Some men prefer blondes, but that doesn’t mean everyone has to go peroxide.
Some men prefer women who have been cut. Is that ok?
In fairness and to clarify my position, I have not and never will ask a man to be circumcised. However, in the US, where I am from, it was standard practice for decades to circumcise boys. So in my limited experience, except for one, the few men I have known are already circumcised. It’s a preference, is all, not a dealbreaker. Unless he can’t keep it clean and it’s like this guy’s, in which case, yes, probably he needs a better partner than I can be.
As far as my limited understanding goes, I thought the purpose of cutting women down there was to remove all pleasure gained from the sex act, while for the men it was hygiene.
In the US, maybe. There was also this belief that it discouraged masturbation. Either way, the difference between male and female is one of degree, not principle.
Hmmm, I wonder if he lost his helmet during the steam cleaning, which it obviously needed. Build up of hair under the under the bell end so tight as to cut off the blood supply. Hells teeth!
Unless he had some sort of mental condition, you really do have to wonder how anybody can get so filthy.
I doubt if anybody who has been on the streets for year would have a knob so disgusting.
Unless he had some sort of mental condition, you really do have to wonder how anybody can get so filthy.
My first was uncircumcised and he showered every day, used deodorant, brushed his teeth – all the “normal” hygiene things. But he never cleaned under the foreskin. Just laziness I guess – he washed everything else. Maybe it’s an easy thing to skip. I dunno – I don’t have the equipment. Most of the adverts were aimed at women worrying if they smelled bad “down there”, but I haven’t seen the same thing for guys, although I also haven’t watched TV in ages.
I think it’s true that women are generally more hygiene conscious, bits wise certainly, but I’ll stick by my assertion.
Bit like smelly feet. There is a world of difference between a touch of camembert, and so filthy that they actually drop off, which is what the situation appears to be.
“I am vigorously opposed to circumcision for anything other than health reasons”
I disagree
I was circumcised aged 9. Done in summer holidays so no school disruption, painful until newly exposed skin toughened up. It was for health, foreskin was too long and no matter how often cleaned pus kept returning
As for others: do it if wanted. It does make hygene better and reduces STIs, inc AIDS risk. I’m glad I needed circumcised
The story of the 57-year-old doesn’t ring true. Penis is hair free
It reminds me of that story about man claiming he was peeing in river and fish swam up urine stream into penis
@LabRat
No girl/woman has ever commented on my being circumsised to me which suggests they dont care or like it. Will try to remember to ask Mrs Pcar tomorrow
Well, yeah – they probably wouldn’t have. It’s pretty common, or was, so chances are that’s all most have known. I think the only reason I developed any kind of preference is the owner of the first non-circumcised one I encountered had bits not quite as bad as the guy in the story, but close.
Eeew. But education is the way forward here. Having had to have such a conversation in the workplace I realise that it isn’t easy.
I think it’s true that women are generally more hygiene conscious, bits wise certainly, but I’ll stick by my assertion.
Bit like smelly feet. There is a world of difference between a touch of camembert, and so filthy that they actually drop off, which is what the situation appears to be.
Apologies, looks like I hit post twice.
Circumcision is a horrible thing to do, with long lasting effects, according to my Jewish friend. He told me he was circumcised shortly after birth, and he couldn’t walk for a year!
Actually the effects are lifelong. Most men are circumcised as infants, so know no different. However men who have it carried out as adults attest that there is a loss of sensitivity, which if you think about it, makes sense.
I’m pretty appalled that in the 21st century it’s deemed OK to cut bits of someone’s body off for what are trivial reasons.
Good prevention of AIDS, STIs and infections is not trivial. Any loss of sensitivity is probably good as one doesn’t ejaculate too soon
Since man started wearing clothes the protection of injury by foreskin has been redundant
I’ve asked Mrs Pcar (Swedish) and she prefers circumsised as cleaner and better & longer sex
As I was circumsised in UK when 9, for health, I don’t know what uncircumsised experience, but I’m happy with my experience
Doing it to babies? Well we jab and jab and jab them without informed consent. Parent’s choice imo and unlike some jabs no ill effects