NSRC: National Sexuality Resource Center

Penis Pressure: Foreskin and Weenxiety

Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 09:48:51am   ►by Jessica Fischer   ►

    Jezebel posted the most adorably bizarre video of a penis doing its best Teletubbie impersonation (NSFW). I immediately reposted onto my Facebook because, you know, sharing is caring. And I care enough to subject my friends to my strange sense of humor.

    While I get that not everyone finds a penis playing peek-a-boo with its own foreskin as funny as I do I did not anticipate the response left by a male friend:

    Surgically altering babies should be outlawed. That is an adult decision. Otherwise it’s mutilation. Period.

    The issue of circumcision is always one I avoid. I do not have a penis and will not have children so I get to steer clear of this hot-button sexual values issue. But, as I repeatedly read his comment, I realized what was bothering me about it: I prefer a foreskin-free penis.

    Typing that sentence makes me wince. Who am I to have a preference for cut cock? Is it shallow? Destructive to men? I try to rationalize my desire via the freedom of personal choice.

    Then I realize that this choice is not as personal as I would like to believe. I live in a culture that regularly circumcises boy babies. Nearly every penis I have seen up close has been sans-foreskin. The penis in its given state looks as alien to me as the unmodified female form looks to so many guys raised in a Maxim world.

    So why do I so love the sight of a circumcised penis? William Street from the movie Chameleon Street said it best:

    I’m a victim brother. I’m a victim of 400 years of conditioning. The man has programmed my conditioning. Even my conditioning has been conditioned!

    Several male lovers/boyfriends have made bitter remarks about their circumcision. There is no going back, no way to know what it would be like if that little peice of skin had been left alone. They must feel helpless, a taboo emotion for men.

    Everyone experiences, at some point, a sense of anxiety about their genitals. Females can willfully ignore what sits between their legs while transgender and intersex individuals often silently sit with horrific anxieties about feeling outside of the body definitions. Men are constantly in contact with their own junk and exist in a culture of open cock dialogue. Whether big, small, crooked, cut or foreskin adorned, most men experience some level of what I call weenxiety.

    A student once asked me, “Sometimes I see pictures of girls, uh, genitals and some of them weird me out. What if- what if a girl I like thinks that about mine?” This is a perfect example of weenxiety. Does it look right? Is it normal? Is my manstick manly enough?

    This isn’t limited to guys lacking pornstar level dicks. My most well-endowed ex was obsessed with proving himself through sex. He had to be the best, his dick had to be the biggest most perfect thing ever. He clung to his big dick like a rescue raft in the stormy social ocean.

    To a certain extent, I think guys measure themselves sexually with their weens. During a discussion with teens about object oriented sexual attraction and one young man said, “But girls are different! There’s only one thing they want from us.”

    “What?,” I asked.  He simply pointed to his crotch.

    Check out more of my writing on my main blog: http://sexademic.wordpress.com/

    Comments

    I love you, Jessi

    I laughed, I thought, I cried (ok, I didn't cry, but I did laugh). I've known too many guys who focused way too much on their cocks; "is it too small" generally being the big worry, and "does it please you better that your ex's" being the other big worry. I suppose who can blame them though, cocks, as you pointed out, are talked about. From a hetero female perspective,women say size doesn't matter, then they sit with their female friends and analyze the size together, the bigger getting "ooohhs" and "ahhhs", while the smaller get "it's not the size of the wand, but the magic in the stick that counts" in kind of a sad tone. As for circumcision, personally, I'm with you on preference, but at the same time, I've never even seen a real not-in-a-book uncircumcised penis. I had a friend who asked me once how old one could be and still get circumcised because she wasn't used to her boyfriends uncut cock and wasn't entirely comfortable with it. Oddly though, years later when it came to her own sons, she opted for keeping all that nature gave them intact. Her husband disagreed until he found out insurance wouldn't cover circumcision anyway. As a female, I don't think it's my decision to make. If I ever had a son, I would probably leave the decision to the kids father; I've seen research for and against, some claiming it helps prevent the spread of HIV, but others have claimed that's not correct. I've known guys who have little sensation because of scarring from circumcision, guys that have had no effect, and guys that weren't circumcised and claimed they climaxed too quickly because of oversensitivity. I suppose as a female if someone thought I should be "circumcised", I'd kick them in the teeth. And on that note, here's a fun article on women feeling self conscious about their vaginas. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article6911418.ece

    Stephanie Kanna on Nov 30, 2009 01:43am

    Male Genital Mutilation

    Ignorance no longer being an excuse, women who say they prefers men who have undergone genital mutilation need to examine the origins of their prejudice. A good start might be found in Kristen O'Hara's book: Sex As Nature Intended It (http://www.SexAsNatureIntendedIt.com)

    Rood on Dec 01, 2009 11:08pm

    preference for intact and natural genitals

    As a gay man who has had lots of sexual experience with male genitals I have seen many men who have had to live with the ravages of the most severe circumcisions imposed on them as infants and children. In some cases repressed anger from this is directed at women, the child perceives the mother as responsible. When someone states a preference for a penis without a foreskin it is a result of cultural conditioning. It is only in cultures that cut off normal healthy body parts that the surgically scarred and reduced genitals are seen as normal; and the severe suffering circumcision imposes on an infant is accepted. If every person who had ever been circumcised were miraculously restored there would be no rush to cut anything off again. The foreskin is as integral to the penis as the eyelid to the eye, the lips to the mouth. Women (and men) who wish to have the best relationships with their children will protect them at all costs from the genital assault of circumcision. Get informed and protect your children's genital integrity. I was cut as a child and have restored much mobility to bring about a more natural appearance and function. No restoration however can replace what was taken, the distal end of the foreskin is the most richly endowed with pleasure receptive Meissners corpuscles. Would you cut off your baby's finger tips? This is an issue of human rights. Finally people are talking about it to some degree. Thanks for this frank discussion.

    James Loewen on Dec 02, 2009 09:41am

    MGM

    Gee, do Jewish, Muslim, or American women (the only people who still circumcise) ever think of themselves in the same category as some African men who think that uncircumcised females genital weird. Ignorance and societal indoctrination is not a rational excuse to mutilate infant males.

    Robert on Dec 02, 2009 09:47am

    Genital cutting

    I am a 45 year old circumcised doctor. I had almost no sensitivity before I restored and I was so disgusted about my mutilation as a baby I started a web site. www.stopthecut.org Stop cutting boys. It robs them of too much pleasure. Doc

    Stopthecut on Dec 02, 2009 07:42pm

    Grow it back again - if only

    It's dopey to assert that wanting normal intact genitals is motivated by anxiety about whose dick is better. It's about the basic human right to keep the perfectly evolved pleasure-receptive parts that nature has been refining for 65 million years. If you prefer mutilated genitals, then YES, you are a monster. But people learn to prefer what they're used to. You can unlearn this. It starts with understanding how wonderful the normal genitals are. Over half the sensual nerve endings are in the foreskin. The hood protects the glans and mucosa from drying and abrasion and the slinky slack affords an exquisite frictionless rolling/gliding mode of stimulation. Future generations will be as embarassed about circumcision as we are about slavery. Foreskin feels REALLY good. HIS body HIS decision. http://tlctugger.com/Media/GrowItBackAgain-LiveOnJayThomas.mp3

    Ron Low on Dec 02, 2009 09:50pm

    Obsession in the USA

    Circumcision makes males question what if and why me, why? Makes them them think on some level that it is needed corrective surgery so necessary that it needs to be done as soon as possible- the next day after being born. So it raises the question: is it up to par now? Circumcision also puts on view the glans. Which means the glans is opened for critical view which doesn't happen when intact. So that's even more worry. This is why circumcised men seek comfort at the urinals that are partitioned. Gone are the urinal troughs, the big free standing urinal bowls, and further back in time- the urinal and spitting gutter running the length of tavern bar counters. (Landlord Jim's, San Francisco, seems still there but covered by a false front.) This too instills "no talking" at public urinals. In intact societies, there's no care about being seen and freely discourse at urinals and too like sun bathing nudity at most all public parks in Germany or of frontal nudity on television. Circumcision thus gives much penile obsession that extends to sex obsession. This is reflected in billboards, adds, sex columns, sex toys, erectile drugs, and fetishes, not seen in noncircumcising societies. Of course, it has been documented by study circumcised men resort to more contrived sex (and videos) probably because of the need to intensify what sexual receptors remain. USA Circumcision removes average 75% of the sexual receptors and half of the erogenous mucosa and all of the most sensitive parts of the penis. Note: Part of the reason restored men feel "not naked" once being covered is from not being exposed to view and changing temperature. A foreskin as security blanket.

    Frank McGinness on Dec 03, 2009 12:03pm

    Thoughts

    Circumcision is all about power over others. Used to mark slaves even US Black & White slaves. Circumcision is an attack at the very core of male identity. An intrusion thrust between true connection of lovers. Circumcision puts society before the individual. Does personal (Moses Maimonides) and global harm (James Prescott's Origins of Violence). Most extreme thoughts: jealousy and anger seeing a group of females and realizing they get to enjoy their intactness, sadness seeing a group of men knowing they are missing a good part of their genitals and anger they are too conditioned to act/react on it, as my tool gets even more dead with keratinizing age just chop off what's left and throw it at the circumcisers, circumcision removes as many receptors as found in all ten fingertips-all circumcisers should have all their fingertips cut off-an eye for an eye, the realization those abused go on to abuse-compassion.

    Frank McGinness on Dec 03, 2009 12:31pm

    too much to ask

    I just want the penis I was born with. Is that too much for an adult male to ask?

    Jerry Norton on Dec 04, 2009 01:45pm

    Circumcision

    I am 72 and circumcised at birth. I HATE BEING CIRCUMCISED. Doctors and hospitals propagandize gullible parents into thinking they are provoding a benefit for their infant son whie they improve their finances.

    Anonymous on Dec 04, 2009 04:15pm

    I think she's got it!

    "Who am I to have a preference for cut cock? Is it shallow? Destructive to men?" Nobody can help their preferences: de gustibus non disputandum (tastes are not to be argued with) - especially sexual tastes. But when it's doing its job, you can't see it, so it'd be irrational to let that taste be the decisive factor. And tastes can change: if you love the guy, you'll soon learn to love his completeness. (There was something to be said for the old custom that you didn't find out what he - or she - had until it was too late.) "I try to rationalize my desire via the freedom of personal choice. Then I realize that this choice is not as personal as I would like to believe." Absolutely! Whose choice? We constantly hear "parents must make many decisions for their children" but parents are never offered the decision to cut any other healthy, functional, erogenous, non-renewable part of their children's bodies off. Because it would be UNETHICAL. So the question is inescapable: why is the infant male foreskin alone fair game? Brava to you! You've advanced the discussion, and I'm posting a link here from The Intactivism Pages.

    Hugh7 on Dec 05, 2009 02:02pm

    Reverse the trend.

    Let's start cutting clit hoods off of baby girls; that would, after all, be the analogous operation. No? That would be mutilation? That would severely impact their sexual experience, reducing their sensitivity over time in an unnatural way? Right.

    Anonymous on Apr 15, 2010 10:48pm