My circumcision style is a result of a compromise. Considering how much trouble I had with it at one point, it almost feels like the story of the ugly duckling that turns out to be a swan at the end.
My original cut was too loose because of the method used. After that I had a revision that has failed to correct what was wrong with it because the doctors involved simply ignored what I wanted and had a "my way or the highway" approach. It would have cost them nothing to do it right, yet they have completely ignored my wishes causing me months of despair and anguish not to mention the need to undergo another surgery to fix their handywork. In all fairness they probably had no malicious intent, they were just really that incompetent because they have performed circumcisions very rarely and revisions almost never. On the other hand several doctors I have encountered during the ordeal were complete and utter jerks, even making mocking comments about circumcisions in general, some were even outright hostile about a patient not being satisfied with the work done by one of them.
Later on I have found out that I wasn't all that exceptionally unlucky. It is not exactly rare to go back for a revision to take more skin off, a seemingly large number of circumcisions end up being too loose, the remaining skin often still covering part the glans when flaccid, and unsatisfactory enough that guys rather go back under the knife than live with it long term. Sloppy stitching and 'less then perfect' cosmetic results are also common when doctors perform a 'functional' circumcision to fix some medical issue but completely disregard that they are working on the very organ that defines a man's masculinity and nobody wants his dick look like an ugly mess.
Another issue is when the health care system is outright anti-circumcision. Several people have complained that even after they have decided to get a circumcision for some medical condition the health care system (usually government run health care in various countries) insist on conservative/alternate treatment (against the patient's wishes) or simply do a different surgery to preserve the foreskin without even consulting the patient. It is fine to offer those treatment options, after all not everyone wants to get a circumcision, but they should not be pushed if the patient has already made up his mind to go for a circumcision. It is a personal matter and personal preferences should be respected.
I finally did get mine fixed and I ended up with a medium and very tight cut and with a neat (although somewhat uneven) scar line. It feels wonderful like finally having clothes that fit you properly after always wearing something that is several sizes too large. I didn't even go for "looks" at the time, I just wanted to be comfortable and get rid of the annoying feeling of the remaining skin sliding up and down the corona of my glans as I moved around. The new version feels great, clean and very comfortable. I also like the neat and streamlined look but as circumcision cosmetic results go I did not think it was all that special.
I am also an overweight geek, so it is not like I look exceptionally manly.
Yet after starting this blog and talking to people about circumcision on social media, over a dozen men have expressed their desire to have a circumcision just like mine. They often ask for details, "specifications" what they need to tell their doctor in order to create something like it.
At least some of them were seeking a revision of a previous unsatisfactory circumcision, others just wanted to make sure it was done right the first time.
People care about various things, some want a cut lower some higher, most guys want a circumcision as tight as humanly possible, some want a neat, nearly invisible cut line while others want an obvious scar (I assume because of the coolness factor), but nobody wants a mess or stich marks.
The one thing guys nearly uniformly want is a glans that is bare at all times. It is not some arbitrary request, it is how a circumcision should be done every time.
The remaining skin should not slide up and down the corona. A partially covered glans, especially with a visible circumcision scar looks awkward, as if someone tried to circumcise you but changed his mind in the middle of the procedure. If one goes under the knife one should be able to expect to have a streamlined look afterwards, not something that is neither here nor there. A lot of men consider aesthetics as one of the main reasons to get circumcised, and they are understandably very particular about their penises, so how it looks does have an impact on their body image.
Also a partial coverage negates a lot of health benefits of circumcision because the remaining skin still can create an enclosed space and breed bacteria, possibly even produce smegma in the sulcus area. It can also prevent the direct stimulation of the sulcus and the corona during intercourse -- one of the advantages of being fully circumcised.
In spite of all this, it seems to be quite common that men are left with too much skin after their circumcision and then they have to go through a revision to achieve a bare glans.
What is beyond my comprehension why doctors can't just do a decent circumcision the first time around. The Jews seem to have figured out some two thousand years ago how a proper circumcision is supposed to look like and how to create one. It shouldn't be rocket science to perform a proper circumcision not some partial cut. If religious circumcisers often without a medical degree (a mohel, a sünnetçi or in some places even the local barber) can perform a circumcision properly why can't a surgeon with an MD degree do it? Why do they often do such a sloppy job, leaving too much skin and stitching it up as if they were closing a potato sack, not operating on someone's delicate body parts?
The lack of standards in this field is disappointing. Really there are only a few things to pay attention to, do not cover the glans, do not create a painful erection (yes there is a happy middle ground in between) and create a decent scar line -- it does not even have to be perfect, just don't make it look like a mess.
Yet some doctors keep doing it wrong. Surgeons really should ask themselves if it was their dick, would they want someone to do to it what they are doing to their patient's body.
Men do care about their penises a great deal, the medical establishment should treat them with dignity not as a piece of meat.
The "Specifications" of My Circumcision Style
Also my frenulum was completely removed (trimmed off at the surface but no cuts into the delta area). I also have a very fine scar, at least for an adult cut, even though it wasn't created by instruments that are state of the art today, stitching was done using a very fine non-absorbable thread so scarring is minimal (i.e. no "railroad tracks" stitch marks). But really most modern suturing materials would do, so long as fine stitches are used, not a few huge ones. I do have some visible scarring on one side because of some complication, (it is certainly an imperfection but I like to think that it just adds character).