• Chloé 🥕@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        7 days ago

        iirc, penile inversion vaginoplasty (which i think is the most common technique of vaginoplasty?) takes penile tissue to create a neovagina. so, the more penile tissue you have, the better your results are likely to be.

        • Gaja0@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          7 days ago

          I feel the same way about circumcision as I do about surgery, sounds owchie owwie.

          • isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Can phallo create a foreskin? If so, I wonder if there’s ever been a peculiar Jewish trans man who got phallo, got it with a foreskin, and then went through with circumcision. Just the right Venn diagram of trans status and idiosyncratic religious beliefs.

          • SeeSmudges@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 days ago

            i mean, they have managed to figure out the owchie owwie part. they don’t do that anymore, but they know how to.

        • Echo (they/she)@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          The more tissue there is, the more depth that can ultimately be created per standard penile inversion. I know a handful of women who have gone through the process, those with smaller initial material ultimately went for zero-depth vaginoplasties because creating a sufficient vaginal canal would require a more involved surgery. Fortunately the ones who received the zero-depth are both lesbians so penetration wasn’t as significant of a desire for them as just getting rid of the nope rope.