Someone else who logs onto this archive occasionally (in recent weeks, more often than I do) made this comment a while ago: "The ones who look good down there seem more satisfied and positive than the others." This is a woman who emphasizes neatness, and,to her, "looking good" means that the scrotum doesn't hang loose or shriveled, doesn't look uneven or have the "messy look," and doesn't have the sides of the sac clinging together on the inside.

Of course, the only pics of someone's crotch area that she has seen, are of Tomas and Gelding. She fantasizes what those without scrotal removal would look like. But I guess the general idea is arguably true, that those who have had both orchiectomy and scrotal removal or scrotal reduction, or whose scrotums have contracted or atrophied against the crotch since their surgeries, are "better looking" than those who had simple orchiectomies. Anyway, I was thinking about this, and it does seem that those who post frequently on the archive, and who have had both orchiectomy and scrotal removal or reduction, do seem to be more positive and upbeat than those who haven't had surgical scrotal reduction and haven't experienced reduction in their sacs by natural contraction of the skin.

Just putting this out there to see if anyone else noticed this. I tend to doubt that having the scrotum removed or reduced, has much effect on someone's happiness or satisfaction. My guess would be, that someone who decided to have the scrotum removed, probably had already accommodated himself to the idea of living as a eunuch, before the surgery, and simply felt that the scrotum ought to be done away with as a useless piece of tissue. In other words, acceptance of scrotal removal, was an indication that the person was going to be content and satisfied with his circumstances after orchiectomy--and the lack of a sac actually has little or no effect on whether someone has positive feelings about his change in sex condition.

Anyway, that's how I'd suspect it is, if those with their sacs removed are actually more content and better adjusted.

dont know about more adjusted but id prefer to have my sac off as well as my nuts

It's like this. If you think you will feel more positive without a scrotum, then you will feel more positive without a scrotum. There's no standard criteria. And some of us really don't care what things look like down there, as long as nothing's infected or painful. Scrotum removal is a much more involved process, exposing a lot more of your internal fluids to the outside environment. That means bigger scars, higher chance of infection, and more of a possibly damaging immune reaction. You have to cut everything off and stitch it back together again, instead of just making one or two small and temporary incisions.

But then again people pierce their ears. So whatever floats your boat, (or doesn't hopefully), go for it. I wouldn't try to make sweeping statements about the cheerfulness of people with and without scrotums though. It's all about attitude, and hormone balance.

Hello folks,

I was surgically castrated in Sept. of 01. I would suppose by now the sack would have shrunk some, but it hasen't yet. When it's cold it draws up and when it's hot it hangs way down. Like it always has.That is when it looks the most offensive. I have always been a stickler that if something has no function, get rid of it. The longer it hangs there the dumber it looks.At some point in the very near future it is going to have to go.

Before my castration, my lady friend said that it probably would look better afterward, if it stayed. Now afterwards, she agrees with me that it would look neater if it was all smooth down there. We stayed together several years then she moved to another state to seek employment. My present lady friend says to leave it alone, it's not hurting anything as it is. Well it's my old beat up sack and Ill do what I want with it. So it is going to have go.

I didn't have it removed when I was castrated because I knew it would already be swollen from the castration and to remove the sack at the same time would have made the swelling even worse. And could have caused the stitches to burst open adding problems I didn't need.

You feel good when you are happy with your apperance. Even though the old sack isn't showing 99% of the time, you know it's there looking ugly 100% of the time. So to make me "feel good" about myself, the sack has to go. That's what the plastic surgery profession is all about isn't it?

Thanks Billie.

Yeah, just get rid of it. It's not serving any purpose, and I can't imagine that it either looks good, or feels good hanging down between your legs like that. It's just a flap of skin now, and it's certainly had enough time to heal since your castration. I can't see any reason for you to put it off. Have your scrotum removed as soon as you can. You'll be thankful you did on these upcoming hot summer days.

As long as you're happy with it, it dosen't matter what others like. To judge how someone else looks to determine how you will like them is, well shallow.

River

I still have my scrotum and it tucks in close to my body. I do not find it bothersome or related to how I feel about myself. I am just very glad to be a eunuch. My scrotum is still sensitive and is a plus for play.

tugon (imported) wrote: Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:10 am I still have my scrotum and it tucks in close to my body. I do not find it bothersome or related to how I feel about myself. I am just very glad to be a eunuch. My scrotum is still sensitive and is a plus for play.

I still have my scrotum as well. It hangs about 1/2" from my crotch most of the time. My cock is a little larger than average, and the sac remnant is barely noticeable. Of course, it's now quite wrinkled and demure. It disappears into the base of my cock when I'm hard. I luv having it fondled when having sex. It's an erogenous area that a guy with balls can't really experience. I usually cum much more quickly if someone fondles the area where the balls used to be attached. I've had 2 rings installed and luv having guys fondle both the sac and the rings.

I'd also decided when I was castrated that I'd heal much more rapidly if I had just the balls removed. I returned to work and most normal activities 2 days following castration 6 years ago. Total healing took just 3 weeks. I've noted that guys who have their sacs removed or significantly reduced at the time of castration take upwards to 8 weeks to heal. I'd be quite willing to have it removed or reduced and assume that the underside of the base of my cock would continue to be erogenous. However, I don't find the desire compelling.

Did someone mention that the scrotum can be reduced instead of removed? and would that make the healing time quicker than getting the whole thing removed?

Lilith