Foreskin Pride

I live in Indianapolis, Indiana and yesterday (June 10th) was the date of our annual Gay Pride celebration. I enjoy going with my husband, my brother and his wife, and whomever else we can drag along with us. It’s always a good time and quite family friendly – which I think most people don’t expect.

Speaking of things unexpected, this year I ran into someone who might be considered something of a celebrity in the restoration community. His name is Ron Low ( INFO SITE HERE ) and I first learned of him only after beginning my own restoration efforts and only as the inventor of the TLC Tugger ( click here to learn about that ) – which I’ve written about and linked to before. But he’s clearly more than just a guy who came up with a means for men to restore their foreskin. He’s an intactivist – someone who speaks against circumcision publicly.

As with many other Gay Pride fests, there are a number of vendors present – organizations who pay a fee in order to access space inside the fest for the purpose of setting up a booth of sorts and gaining visibility to the gay community and its supporters during the festival. Ron Low had a booth set up for “Foreskin Pride” and employed the rainbow colors of the Gay Pride flag.

He was also one of the few vendors there who actually left his own booth (it was manned by others who were there with him) and went into the festival to actively seek interactions with fest goers. He had in his hands a small stack of what might be called pamphlets, although it was really more like a card – thin paper stock, though, printed on both sides. You’ll see that here.

This approach surely gained the intactivist cause DOUBLE exposure. People wandering around from one direction might encounter his booth where volunteers were stationed to answer questions and educate people and Ron himself, away from the booth, might encounter those coming from a different direction from which point he could place a card into their hands, speak to them directly, and put a face to the cause – showing everyone a normal guy and not some “weirdo,” fringe personality.

When I saw Ron, I immediately recognized him and started making my way to him – dragging my husband and family with me in the process. He was absolutely approachable and quite friendly – ever ready for a photo op, as you can see here, and which I took advantage of! (Not the best pic of me, but whatever)

Ron Low and Me

My sister-in-law, who will be giving birth to her first son in August, was very clear (and immediately so!) that when my nephew was born she WOULD be having him cut. She referred back to a man she’d dated before meeting my brother and how he was uncut and “his cock looked like one of those tube worms you see at the bottom of the ocean.” I expressed my disappointment and sadness, but tried to do so without bringing the mood down too much or being too confrontational – after all, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, right? Arguing with her right there and trying to shove intactivist literature down her throat in the middle of a Pride event would have been unproductive, to say the least. But I digress.

Every year at the Indy Pride event there is a booth for foreskin restoration. I don’t know exactly when this started but I can attest that it’s been the case for at least the last few years. This is the first time I’ve seen (or at least the first time I’ve recognized) Ron as being present, too. It’s a fantastic boon to the Indy area to have him attend and I hope our Pride event (as well as any other fests these guys could have a presence at!) continues to present foreskin restoration to the masses as well as education about how terrible and unnecessary circumcision is.

Thanks for reading!

Ruined Glans

On my Facebook feed recently an intactivist posted something from the Not Yours To Cut site which I thought would be informative to share here. By clicking here you can access the site and the exact content of what I saw in my Facebook feed.

The content has a rather “sandwich” feel to it. It starts with text to read (only a little) and ends with a little more reading. The beginning text covers the the idea of how precious an un-ruined glans is and speaks to females about the idea of their own genitals being mutilated. The last bit of text focuses a little differently and discusses more the “matte” texture of a ruined glans, but still speaks to those who are female or who are with females. This is probably lost on many people, but that’s a shame because few things highlight the insanity of circumcision like shining light on how people view the idea of slicing off female genital parts versus how they view the same happening to males.

In the same way the text is split and acts like the “bread” of the sandwich which is the page’s content, so to the photo content. The umm….. meat of the post is the photo content which lies in between the bread text. I almost found this humorously ironic since the penis is sometimes colloquially called “meat” and also has an anatomical feature called “meatus.” Anyway, enough playing on words. The photos create a contrast similar to that created by the text in that at the top of the page there are photos of uncut penises to demonstrate the anatomy and some physiology and to present the first half of the contract between being cut and uncut. The latter half of the photo content presents the effects of removing the foreskin, and so the “sandwich” is completed.

I trust that you will find the site and the page of it which I have referenced here to be easily accessible and easily understood.

Thanks for reading.