2007-02-24 23:34:10 · 10 answers · asked by jerry b 1 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
If it could be done I would imagine that you would lose length and further maybe even some sensation. Why question back to the asker is why would anyone want to reverse a circumcision? If you ever saw a person that had to have a emergency circumcision because the skin was to tight and they no longer could urinate or had a infection between the for skin and the head of the penis you might change your mind
2007-02-24 23:56:39 · answer #1 · answered by ffperki 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not ny any means I know of. They can make it look like the dick you were born with but they can't restore the sensitivity and reconnect all the microscopic nerve endings. That has to be done pretty quickly after the nerves have been severed. And even when they perform the surgeries within a matter of hours, look at people that have had severed hands reattached. They're lucky if they can hold a cup of coffee with them. I have serious doubts that the function of long-gone erectile tissue (and where would they get it - uncircumsized cadavers?) could be restored in any way other than appearance.
And Robert KFC Lee or whatever your name is, I'm sick to death of the hygiene argument. If you can't figure out how to wash your dick you shouldn't be trusted with one in the first place. Maybe they should have chopped your toes off so you wouldn't get toecheese. Or removed your genitals entirely and cauterized the whole area. And chopped off your arms so your pits wouldn't smell.
Or just chopped off your head so you wouldn't stink this place up with that same stupid-assed, indefensible justification.
2007-02-25 09:22:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
By not circumcising...
It's really not more hygienic to do so in any way, and is a completely optional procedure that has no real benefits, although I think it does destroy some of the nerve sensitivity down there.
2007-02-25 04:08:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes they can now some men want it back i still have mine if any of you lovely ladies would like to see a nice black one in all its glory you can google circumcision and read that they can . hell if they can put a dick on a woman i think they can sew a little skin on a man
2007-02-25 08:13:46 · answer #4 · answered by Blackjack 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It means that they did not get circumcision in the first place, NOT that they had it put back on.
2007-02-25 16:28:12 · answer #5 · answered by Cheshire Cat 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahyahaahhahhahahahofuckinha
ahahahahahahyyqhyahah
you take the forskin from the phalice on your forhead
no of course not you dik
2007-02-24 23:41:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes it's normal but circumcision is better n more hygienic.
2007-02-24 23:40:51 · answer #7 · answered by robert KS LEE. 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
if he is uncircumcised is one way.the other would be foreskin restoration or reconstruction.
2007-02-26 16:21:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
not getting it done at birth??
2007-02-24 23:39:31 · answer #9 · answered by 40 oz to freedom 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No
2007-02-25 03:38:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋