Originally Posted by Jordanxxx
‘removed the adhesions’ it means that the surgeon removed the frenulum?
No, when males are born the foreskin almost always covers the whole glans and is adhered to the glans by a synechial membrane (shared in common between the skin and the glans) which - if left intact - would break down on its own over the course of say 3 - 10 years.
The process of “breaking the adhesions” at birth is utterly brutal, akin to ripping fingernails from your nailbed. It’s done with a blunt probe rammed between the two layers and forced all around. It leaves the glans with raw wounds (like if you burned the inside of your mouth with scalding pizza) of haphazard severity that often heal poorly, leaving the glans permanently pitted. Sometimes the shaft skin forms attachments to the glans before it scabs over leading to gnarly skin bridges spanning the corona.
The use of the blunt probe blindly to destroy the normal synechial bonds ALSO does cause haphazard damage to the exquisite frenulum (which most intact men describe as their best part). The damaged mess of a frenulum is more likely to be unnecessarily excised to hide the doctor’s clumsiness (although there is no careful way to use the blunt probe in a baby’s foreskin).
Doctors describe breaking these normal infant adhesions like they’re evil gremlins that must be conquered. But the full adherence of the skin to the glans for infants is the healthiest thing imaginable to keep sewage out of the urinary meatus, and doctors wreck this perfect natural defense and cash a check for the effort.
In adults, “adhesions” can mean that the circumcision scar heals poorly and adheres to the underlying structures of the penile shaft, limiting skin-tube mobility.
A 2010 study by Fletcher found that half of adult males cut in childhood had UNINTENDED functional or cosmetic impairments resulting from their circumcisions that many had never realized were not natural and normal penile features.