Cut or uncut?

Question

I'm confused whats the difference? I know they cut the foreskin but I dont get how it looks different. Whats the purpose of cutting boys? Does it affect anything? How do they look different?

Answer 1

They look alike when erect because the foreskin slides back. An uncircumcised penis has a foreskin. A circumcised penis' foreskin has been cut off by surgery (circumcision). The following link has an illustration, and it's from a government health site:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/imagepages/19093.htm

There's also a blog called The Uncut C.o.c.k if you're that interested in real pictures. The foreskin's purpose is to protect the head of the penis. It keeps it moist, so it doesn't end up drying up like your hands can, so no cracks develop on the head. It's also supposed to keep it sensitive (see the medical study in the Fox News link below). It also slides up and down during sex and masturbation (which feels good since its already lubricated). So it doesn't just create unsanitary conditions; all it takes is a simple 5 second rinse when you shower. In general, this link does a good job at describing the function of the foreskin. This website describes the difference in words:
http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,285532,00.html

The USA is the last developed nation doing it without medical or religious reasons, but even our rates have fallen to as low as 14% in some states, opposed to about 90% nationally in the 60s and 70s. See the following link for more research from medical studies and statistics on circumcision.
http://circresearch.googlepages.com

Answer 2

The only difference is that an uncut penis still has the foreskin intact, whereas a cut penis has it removed. The foreskin should be there to cover and protect the highly-sensitive head of the penis. So when you're cut, you have the head permanently exposed.
Why is it done? Well that depends where you come from. America is the only remaining developed country that routinely cuts their newborn boys. Elsewhere its usually only done for religious or medical reasons, e.g. the foreskin is too tight to be pulled back.
Here's how they look different: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/images/ency/fullsize/9729.jpg
As you can see from the previous answerers, the myth is that the foreskin is unhygienic and being cut is 'cleaner'. That is only true if the uncut guy never washes. I dont know about you, but I shower every day and washing my penis properly is as routine as lifting my arms to wash my armpits. Hence, I and the majority of other uncut guys NEVER have any problems with their foreskin.

Answer 3

There is no purpose to do it, which is why it's only done in some religious cultures, and to half the boys in the USA (cultural thing - they don't understand about foreskin).

It is not cleaner or better or anything. 85% of men in the world are uncircumcised and circumcision rates are dropping even in the USA.

They look weird after they've been circumcised because the head is permanently exposed (it's meant to be an internal thing) it gets drier and different and they often have a scar line. They most likely lose sensitivity and also sex can be worse for their female partners http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com

It is not clean to be circumcised or anything...that's rubbish...we have water...

Answer 4

If a male is uncut, he looks like he has a hood covering the head of his penis, which he won't have if he was circumcised. In a circumcised male, the entire head is exposed. The US is the only country in the world that routinely circumcises infant boys for non-religious reasons. I understand that the practice became widespread as a way to try to stop masturbation but now Americans have become culturally accustomed to having the procedure done and they prefer the appearance of a circumcised penis. There's really no compelling medical reason I could find for doing it. It prevents an extremely rare form of cancer and supposedly it cuts down on urinary tract infections even though my 51-year-old husband is uncut and has never had a urinary tract infection in his life. Urinary tract infections are mainly a female problem but I don't hear people advocating the removal of their labia or clitoris to prevent them. That's why I think it's something males should decide for themselves if they want it. I don't like the idea of making alterations to other people's bodies without their consent or knowledge unless there's a real valid medical reason for it.

Answer 5

the foreskin looks like a sheath over the penis. it is pulled back during sex. when a boy is circumsized, the foreskin is removed and the head of the penis is visible. it has no affect on sexual performance or everyday function it is merely a decision made by the parents and is often traditional to their religon. some people focus on a hygiene aspect believing that it is easier to keep clean.

Answer 6

The purpose is hygene. The foreskin covers the head of the penis, where baceria can develop. I'm cut, but from what I understand it decreases sensitivity once cut, since you are losing lots of nerve endings. It looks different because you can't see the head if uncut.

Answer 7

an uncircumsized penis will look like an uncut one when the sheath is pulled back or retracted. when it's unsheath there's this amount of extra skin overlaying the shaft of the penis.

circumsion is currently a debatable issue. In America it seems to be more on a so-called medical basis. It also seems to be on a give the doctor more money scheme.

some men who are uncut claim their penis is more sensitive than one is has had their foreskin removed or circumsized.

Answer 8

I thought this was a poll by the headline! :-)

All I can add to this is that I've heard being cut is typical only in the USA, the rest of the world never saw the point. How it became so "fashionable" here would be interesting to know.

Answer 9

it doesnt do much mostly justs looks different its just a tradition for some cultures
it look different cut looks like uncut pulled back all the time lol

Answer 10

BioEssays. 2007 Oct 12;29(11):1147-1158

Why circumcision is a biomedical imperative for the 21(st) century

School of Medical Sciences and Bosch Institute, Building F13, The
University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia.

Circumcision of males represents a surgical "vaccine" against a wide
variety of infections, adverse medical conditions and potentially
fatal diseases over their lifetime, and also protects their sexual
partners. In experienced hands, this common, inexpensive procedure is
very safe, can be pain-free and can be performed at any age. The
benefits vastly outweigh risks. The enormous public health benefits
include protection from urinary tract infections, sexually transmitted
HIV, HPV, syphilis and chancroid, penile and prostate cancer,
phimosis, thrush, and inflammatory dermatoses. In women circumcision
of the male partner provides substantial protection from cervical
cancer and chlamydia. Circumcision has socio-sexual benefits and
reduces sexual problems with age. It has no adverse effect on penile
sensitivity, function, or sensation during sexual arousal. Most women
prefer the circumcised penis for appearance, hygiene and sex. Given
the convincing epidemiological evidence and biological support,
routine circumcision should be highly recommended by all health
professionals.

BioEssays 29:1147-1158, 2007. (c) 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
PMID: 17935209 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/34201?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0