*You will need Adobe's Acrobat Reader
for this. If it is not already on your machine (check-search) you can download it free from
www.adobe.com

Acorn's Newsletter has been published every year since 1988.
Back numbers are available to members if you download and print out the Adobe Acrobat* PDF Order Form. Complete the details and forward with your remittance to The Acorn Society at the address on the form.

Below we reprint the contents list and a sample article from each edition.

Acorn No.1 2001

Editorial Steve
My Experience Peter
Kiwi Confidante KG
Have You Ever Wondered? ET
Second Instalment SJ
Circumcision Problems Anon
Disadvantage Of ‘Muslim’ Style Of Circumcision SM
Prince Albert? Gary
Response To ‘Prince Albert?’ Vernon
Book Review W
Recollections CN
Jealous? Jim
Cut Puppeteers Will
Reflections On A Theme Anon
Too Clean KG
Circumcision Festival David

Disadvantage Of ‘Muslim’ Style Of Circumcision
Your correspondents P.T. and R.F.W. both extol the delights of what they call the ‘Muslim’ style of circumcision with the inside of the foreskin stretched up the shaft of the penis so that the scar line is well back from the glans. I cannot comment on whether this is really typical of Muslim cuts (the only one of which I’ve seen close up was not like that but had a faint scar just behind the glans) but I do think your readers should be made aware of a major potential disadvantage of this style of cut.

As Vernon correctly pointed out in the same issue, there is increasing evidence that circumcision offers partial (and I emphasise partial) protection against HIV transmission. In fact there are now dozens of studies that have consistently found that men without foreskins are less likely to contract the virus than those with. So compelling is the evidence that even the BBC documentary programme Horizon devoted an episode to the topic recently. It has become clear that one of the main mechanisms by which the virus gains entry to a man from a woman is through the inner surface of the foreskin. This surface lacks the protective layer of keratin found on the outer surface of the foreskin, and on the shaft and glans (whether circumcised or not) of the penis. In addition, the inner surface of the foreskin is rich in Langerhans’ cells which are especially prone to HIV infection. These cells are not present elsewhere on the penis. The frenulum is another vulnerable point as it is susceptible to minute tears.

As it is now apparent that the inner foreskin is the Achilles heel of the penis it would seem prudent to remove as much of it (and the frenulum) as possible during a circumcision leaving the scar line as close to the glans as possible. A circumcision that left the inner foreskin intact, but spread out along the shaft, would seem unlikely to confer as much benefit with respect to reducing viral transmission. Indeed, differing styles of circumcision may even explain why studies have found so much variation in the effectiveness of the procedure at reducing HIV infection.

I might add that, in my experience, (circumcised by choice aged 30, scar 1 cm behind the glans) the small bit of remaining inner foreskin is rather prone to friction burns in the event of over-enthusiastic masturbation. I certainly would not want any more of it to have been kept. Nevertheless, like every man I know who’s been cut as an adult for whatever reason, I am thrilled with the result and would not want my foreskin back even if it were possible.

I appreciate that HIV prevention may not have been the primary intention of your correspondents when they had their operations (and I wish them years of safe joy with their redesigned organs) but should certainly be borne in mind by anyone considering a circumcision for themselves, or their children.

Finally, I am not a medical doctor but the above does seem self-evident. The comments of your medically qualified readers would be most welcome.

SM ­ Cheshire

Acorn No.2 2001

What Exactly Constitutes A Good Circumcision? Michael
Browned Off Thoughts Michael
In Love With Circumcision Christopher
Indecent? ET
Alternative To Revision CB
Down Under R
More Of The Penis Puppeteers Henry
Further Advantages Of
The Muslim Style Anthony
Can’t Say No A
Ideas To Ponder Over MW
A Contribution D
A Snip In Time Saves Lives
Snippets From Around The World Henry
The Acorn Complex Alan

A Contribution Congratulations on doing a difficult job Steve, in trying to balance pro and anti circ members views and prejudices. We have now had five issues of the magazine produced by you as editor and I must say that they have been both stimulating and generally refreshing.

There have been a few blots such as I.O. ­ Herts who bemoans the fact that we have a ‘Declining membership’ while you, the editor, is saying that the membership is slightly up at just over 180.

Of course R.B.W. also trotting out his fantasy of ‘A haemorrhaging membership’ despite you telling it like it is of a slightly rising membership. His tired litany of ‘comments’ bemoaning a lifetime of anguish and distress at being circumcised was first aired in 8/98 and we have now read five times of his woes, the latest in 3/2000. I hope he soon gets over his neurotic obsession of being, in his mind, mutilated. Personally I find some of his remarks objectionable and even insulting to the pro circ members. Such polemic we can do well without. Perhaps he would do better to stick with his Nocirc fanatical friends or, having stated his opinions, leave it at that. Constant reiteration is not needed.

In contrast there is C.R. with his Childhood Wish Fulfilled (3/2000) and Peter (1/2001) telling of his Experience, and many others. Men who do not denigrate others but tell of their own feelings.

I find Cavelier Reasoning difficult to follow as his feelings appear to be ambivalent. He says that he suffers with balanitis and his doctor advised him to have it done and stop messing about. He also says that he prefers the look of a tight cut and that the appearance of his cock with the foreskin fully forward tapering to a point looks infantile and pathetic. One can only echo his doctor’s comment to stop messing about and have it circumcised then it won’t look infantile and pathetic.

K.G. says that his illusions have been shattered with regard to circumcision in New Zealand. I would suggest that the uncut N.Z. man he encountered in the sauna is expressing his own wish to be in the majority although strangely he says that most antipodean men remain in favour of a tightly cut penis. I would like to revive K.G.’s faith in antipodean circumcision. I cannot trot out figures but I can say that the majority of men and boys I know and have seen are circumcised. I am a member of a sports club and see men and boys in the showers and changing room and believe me circumcised cocks well outnumber uncuts. There appears to be a need by some men to extend their own circumcised state or lack of it onto as many others as possible. The imagination is a wonderful thing though often unreliable. For instance some uncut/cut men feel more secure if they consider most other men are like themselves. In that way figures become exaggerated, or even meaningless.

Thank you Steve for your efforts which are appreciated by most of us and I would urge members to put their thoughts on paper to help fill the columns of the magazine. It is great to know that others are interested in the same things and are prepared to share with the rest of the membership.

D ­ NZ