The Happy Trail

To snip or not to snip: weighing pros and cons

At birth, the penis comes with an extra inch or two of skin that covers the glans (the head of the penis) when flaccid.

This is the foreskin, a contentious debate in Penile Politics these days.

Many individuals at birth, or other times, undergo circumcision to remove the foreskin from the penis, leaving the glans open when both flaccid and erect.

There are those who value circumcision is as a tradition in both religious and cultural contexts. It is common in America, while many Europeans are, as they say, “uncut.”

For starters, the foreskin’s purpose is for sexual function and protection. Sex educator Betty Dodson explains that “your foreskin acts as a natural lubricant.”

The foreskin can help ease the penis’s function with less chafing; the extra skin picks up the slack, if you will.

The benefits of a foreskin do not necessarily end there. As mentioned before, the foreskin protects the head of the penis, which is the most sensitive part of the male genitalia.

This added protection can allow for even more sensation, since the glans does not come into as much contact.

If you or your partner is uncircumcised, try adding the foreskin into your play to gain that extra feeling.

Gently massage both inside and out, even add your tongue circling the foreskin and the glans within your routine.

In terms of sexual pleasure, keeping your foreskin can provide some benefits.  But it has also given way to further fetishes of the penis.

For many individuals, especially in the United States, having a foreskin is viewed as hot and sexy in an almost exotic way.

Many porn sites have specific options to view uncircumcised men, and some websites even and studios cater solely to those who prefer uncut guys.

There are now ways in which you can “restore” your foreskin.  Certain urologists provide tensioning devices and surgery, and several bloggers tout lightly tugging on a daily basis to restore skin growth on the shaft (I do not recommend this technique).

Personally, I find that this is problematic in terms of the climate surrounding the preference of specific types of bodies.

There is nothing wrong with having an uncut penis over a cut one,  but one should not be shamed toward a specific body type, whether it is circumcised or not.

I feel that there should not be a preference, yet the majority of American men are circumcised. The question is, “Why?”

The American Academy of Pediatrics has “argued that circumcision doesn’t appear to adversely affect penile function,” (Carlin Ross,  So why the need to lose the skin?

When pondering this question, I checked my usual sources for possible reasons, and many sex educators and advocates said the same thing: money.

An overwhelming amount of anti-circumcision activists have cited that though foreskin removal is a rite in many cultural and ethnic groups, the dominance of it in America is a sign of cultural lag and it is no longer necessary or good.

Betty Dodson—the educator mentioned previously—cites how many hospitals and medical supply companies buy specific equipment for the procedure.

There are specific molds and casts in which to strap and constrain infants during the operation.

And it is no longer done with a knife. The dominant procedure now includes the use of two metal rings that constrict the blood flow to the foreskin, enabling it to ‘fall off’ (Betty Dodson,

This technique has been described as unethical, and even barbaric, all for the use of difference in penis ideal.

Regardless of that, whether circumcised or not, it is important to own your body and not be ashamed.

But whether you’re circumcised or not, it should be the individual decision, not society’s, to ensure that your body is your own.