Desperately seeking… foreskins!
There’s been a lot on my mind this year, but at the top of it is this: foreskin.
I enjoy reading about sex both in romance novels and in non-fiction. The other day I was flipping through a tome entitled The Guide to Getting It On that devoted an entire chapter to the foreskin—discussing what it is, how men and their partners feel about it, and how they make it a pleasurable part of their sensual/sexual lives. It then occurred to me that not only have I never encountered a chapter in a romance novel about the foreskin and sex, but I’ve never seen the word ‘foreskin’ printed on a single page in one!
In all the detailed descriptions I’ve read of the penis in romance, the writing has never suggested that I and the hero’s partner are encountering anything other than a ‘cut’ member. And I’ve read about a lot of different penises—contemporary American surgeon penises, thirteenth-century Scottish warrior penises, and human-lion hybrid paranormal penises which have many—ahem—special features. I read m/f and m/m romances, and one would think since there are twice the number of penises in m/m romances, maybe the math would work in favor of the occasional foreskin appearance in those, but nope. Not one.
From my layman’s research, I’ve gleaned that circumcision is not the global default for men—I’ve seen stats that suggest about 70% of the world’s male population is actually uncircumcised (but also over half the male population in the US, where I live, is circumcised). So why is romance, with all its diverse depictions of sex, so shy about fictional foreskins? Where are the puzzled virgins in the Scottish castles going ‘woah, woah, what just came out of there?’ Where are the experienced heroes and heroines getting naked with their partners and crowing ‘My favorite! Foreskin play!’
I’m wondering why and I’m asking if you wonder this too. Have you ever read a romance that features a hero with a foreskin? Do you read romance written/published in parts of the world where not circumcising is the common practice and you’re surprised when you read a romance in which the hero isn’t packing a foreskin?
Please, do tell. I’d love to solve this mystery.
Another one for the list: Something Borrowed by Eve Dangerfield, with a French hero. Only mentioned in passing, though, and simply described as uncircumcised.
While I’m glad to see heroes with foreskins in romance, I would prefer for authors to use the word “intact” (or just describe the function, as the case may be) instead of “uncircumcised” or “uncut” as the last two terms imply something wasn’t done that was supposed to be done as opposed to a natural anatomical state. It’s not an argument I’m going to lambast all over Twitter or anything like that, but I wanted to throw that suggestion out there for those thinking about writing a romance hero with foreskin.
We know how you feel, Nan!
I’m just reading Jay Hogan’s latest, Off Balance – much is made of one of the MCs being uncut and there are several mentions of the foreskin! And like I said somewhere around here, I’ve seen it mentioned fairly often in m/m.
I am rereading Elizabeth Hoyt’s Scandalous Desires. The hero is clearly uncircumcised.
And I am rereading Lily Morton’s After Felix and noticed a direct reference to the foreskin and sensitivity.
Am I allowed to post a 6 line quotation?
I don’t see why not – you can put it under a spoiler tag by using the [+] button.
Okay, this is a quotation from Lily Morton’s After Felix, published earlier this year:
“Sensitive,” he says knowingly. “I always envy you non-circumcised blokes. The head’s always so tender.”
“Mmm,” I say…………………………….
I’m from Northern Europe, and at least in my country non medical circumcisions are generally considered to infringe on the inviolability and self-determination of the child. However, the procedure is not prohibited and there are about 400 boys circumcised every year for cultural or religious reasons. So I guess there really are many kinds of practises even in the Western world.
I’ve never seen a circumcised penis in real life. In other words. I’ve never seen the kind of penis that are usually featured in the contemporary romance books by American authors. It hasn’t really bothered me. I mean, I’ve been aware that circumcision is common in the US so the high occurrence of circumcised penises in books written there has seemed to be in line with that. I wouldn’t say no to more variety though.
I can’t remember having read a sex scene where a foreskin was mentioned. Then again I reckon it’s perfectly possible that I have and just don’t remember it as there wouldn’t be anything particularly memorable about an uncircumcised penis to me. Around here they are such an everyday thing. So unless the scene was otherwise memorable or a big deal was made out of the foreskin then there’s really no reason for me to have paid any particular attention.
In historicals the dismissal of foreskins has sometimes felt a bit weird, but then the prose tends to rather often be more euphemistic, so perhaps I’ve just not understood what the writers have been alluding to.
So funny! I’m a nurse, in the USA , and I can’t even tell you some of the things I have seen and dealt with! Foreskins among them! Let’s just say things can get a bit tricky in the older generation. If I didn’t know better, I might suspect foreskin continues to grow as other items begin to shrink…
Aren’t noses and ears supposed to get bigger with age too? Your findings about foreskin wouldn’t surprise me in the least…
Well, they do say ‘write what you know.’ :-) I’m an American and most of the men I’ve been with were born & raised in the US; most were circumcised as infants. One was not handled well. He was functional, and if I had no point of comparison I might not have noticed. In college I dated an Italian who was not circumcised. I thought the ‘intact’ look was very interesting; it did feel different (and respond differently); and while one guy is a mighty small sample size it was enough that when I wrote a male MC from Italy, he was not circumcised. And I did mention it in the main love scene, because the female MC – being born & raised in the US – had not encountered that before.
Generally, I’ve only made a point of it in a context like that. A M/M WIP features an Englishman and an American. It’s again the American’s first time encountering an intact man so he takes note of it. But not, like, every time they get busy. Only the first time, when it’s all ‘oh hey what’s different here.’
I’ve read quite a number of M/M books set (and written) in the UK and it hasn’t come up (Ha!) which I would venture to guess is because to the MCs it’s not a thing worth internal monologuing about, much less talking about. It is what it is, in fact.
Cannot recall reading a single M/F romance in which the status of the male MC’s foreskin was explicated. There must have been one, at least?!
Those are all great points about context in sex scenes- particularly when there is a cultural difference that causes surprise during the first encounter.
As for the M/M books set and written in the UK, that’s interesting about foreskin not being mentioned. It could very well be because there’s nothing unusual about it over there, as you mentioned. Plus, like you said, there probably wouldn’t be a bunch of internal monologuing about something that common. However, I wonder if the omission may also be due to marketability in the US. I.e. Maybe there’s a reader bias against foreskin in America that might encourage authors to leave the matter unmentioned? Total speculation on my part; I could be way off the mark about this (wouldn’t be anywhere near the first time!) Also, I suppose it largely depends upon what the m/m characters are specifically doing to each other in the bedroom, and how explicitly the author describes the mechanics.
Without getting too vulgar for AAR, your point about the intact Italian brought to mind another issue I have heard surrounding circumcision. In America anyway, there is a persistent misconception I’ve heard bandied about that the presence of foreskin isn’t conducive to fellatio. More than once, I’ve even heard the somewhat creepy argument, “Make sure you circumcise your son so he can get blow jobs when he grows up!” (Uh, ew? We’re talking about a baby here!) Anyway, thanks to the internet, there are plenty of NSFW sources that easily refute this concern…
Hahahaha. All I have to go on is personal experience and if we start talking about those in too much detail this will become a VERY different site! ;-)
Yes, it’s probably best if we end this thread here for the sake of propriety. Glad I gave you a chuckle though! ;-)
I am a Jewish woman who has been married for many years to a Jewish man and a circumcised penis is what I know! Both my adult son and my grandson are both circumcised! I am surprised that the religious aspect of this has not been mentioned!
“I am surprised that the religious aspect of this has not been mentioned!”
Well, I did mention religion in an unapproved comment, but I’m afraid I got too confrontational for this forum/venue.
Keeping things neutral, circumcision is a practice in both Judaism and Islam. There has been much debate since the beginning of Christianity whether circumcision is required, optional, or forbidden. In other religions, it is unheard of. I understand there is also debate about the religious necessity of circumcision within different sects of Judaism today. For example, the brit shalom (naming ceremony) is sometimes employed as an alternative to the brit milah (covenant of circumcision).
A number of my male friends who are Jewish like to joke about the bris a lot. I think in many countries circumcision is considered an instant indication that someone is likely Jewish. In the US as a large number of men are circumcised it’s just the “norm”.
It’s interesting that when Christianity arose one of the first exceptions they made to the laws required to be a practicing Jew was getting rid of the need to be circumcised along with dietary restrictions. I can certainly understand people’s reluctance to engage in any kind of “optional” surgery back in the days before antibiotics and painkillers!
I really feel like saying THANK YOU for bringing us this topic.
It is not currently fashionable, political and yet quite relevant, and it shows AAR looking “behind” the trends, at the unseen or overlooked topics, too. I like that !!
Also, very often, issues where women are potentially hurt are in the forefront, while issues where men are potentially hurt are less visible.
A lovely balance in the various blog topics, again and again!
Also, I learned a lot:
As many said, we have a different approach in Europe, and I never thought about topics like locker room teasing or expectation of mothers to consent … valuable to read opinions and stories on something that I just do not know about!
Thank you for putting the foreskin front and center !
It was all Charlotte’s idea and, yes, it was an excellent one!
I too have enjoyed reading about differing perspectives here.
Context is often almost everything!
“Also, very often, issues where women are potentially hurt are in the forefront, while issues where men are potentially hurt are less visible.”
I think this is sadly very, very true. And not just for circumcision (although that is a big one). Some people get downright angry when men’s issues are brought to the forefront because of perceived “privilege.” High workplace fatalities, military drafts (in some countries still), divorce court fiascos, etc. These are all topics worth discussing among others (not necessarily here at AAR, just in general), and yet they are often dismissed out of hand. So, yes, Liselotte, I am glad too that AAR has put the foreskin front and center. It’s quite refreshing.
Unfortunately nowadays so many things have been turned into a game of “so what about X because Y has it worse” -even when the two things are not really comparable.
I know I am capable about caring about a multitude of things at the same time and other people are as well which is why I appreciate the nuanced discussions here.
That’s very, very true, Chrisreader. Your comment about “so what about X because Y has it worse” reminds me of a brilliant routine by the comedian Doug Stanhope. Keeping it clean for AAR, he basically said, “Your suck doesn’t make my suck, suck less. For example, if I complain I’ve gained too much weight and some really overweight person comes along and says, ‘How dare you complain about not fitting into your pants when I can’t fit behind the wheel of my car!’ Well, that’s too bad. But your inability to fit behind the wheel of your car doesn’t make my pants fit any better.” Not fat shaming at all, BTW. I just think Mr. Stanhope used a very clear fictional example of the problem with what I like to call “the oppression Olympics.” Incidentally, there’s also a Monty Python routine that explores this phenomenon with four wealthy men bragging about how poor they used to be- to the point where the one-upsmanship becomes increasingly ridiculous and overshadows the fact they all overcame various hardships.
“I know I am capable about caring about a multitude of things at the same time and other people are as well which is why I appreciate the nuanced discussions here.”
I agree with you 100% on this. As much as I love AAR, it is discouraging that it is part of an increasingly shrinking group of websites able to handle differences of opinion and nuanced discussions. I’ve seen way too many comments elsewhere in the realm of “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” or outright hostility and accusations of being wishy-washy for trying to find common ground with other commenters.
I know I have a tendency to get a little excitable and could really work on my diplomacy skills (really, Nan? Do tell…) But at least the moderation on AAR sticks to its guns on encouraging, fostering, and enforcing polite behavior rather than policing ideas. I really appreciate that, and am glad I haven’t been given the boot yet. :)
I’ve read the description “mushroom head” of the penis scores of times and I’m just trying to decide if that is code for circumcised? I think those look more “mushroomy,” so to speak… but now I have great concerns about my search history!
Come to think of it, I’ve seen the “mushroom” description too, plus some others. Another “hint” I’ve noticed in some HRs is when the heroine notes that the head of the hero’s member looks “smooth” or “slick” or “moist.” I usually interpret this to mean the hero is intact- although it could be a reference to pre-ejaculate depending upon how it’s written.
“Mushroom” always makes me want pizza.
LOL! Thanks for ruining one of the standby purple prose words for an exposed glans. :)
That’s not necessarily a bad thing…. ;)
Ha ha! :)
I remember the massive pearl-clutching that took place when I raised the um, issue, on the Beau Monde’s loop some 15 or so years ago. (Yes, my heroes did, explicitly or otherwise).
Isn’t it amazing how times have changed? What was considered shocking in a book or discussion even ten years ago probably wouldn’t even raise many eyebrows today.
It’s funny to think that simple anatomy would be enough to induce pearl clutching but I remember that attitude all too well.
Because there is no humor too lowbrow for me, I’m giggling a little at “raised the issue” in this context. ;)
No humor is too lowbrow for you? Are you a South Park fan? ;)
I have definitely read about foreskins recently in some historical romances. I can’t remember anything about the books, so obviously the stories were not that memorable.
I read a series of romantic mysteries called The Bandy Alexander Mysteries by Shelly Fredman. In one of the early books, Brandy has a romantic encounter with Nick, who is not circumcised. She freaks out because she’s never seen that, and a fun little exchange ensues about about the “natural” look. The author shared that this scene was taken from her own first reaction to the uncircumcised penis of her future husband. I really enjoyed the series, which starts with NO SUCH THING AS A SECRET. They have a little bit of a Stephanie Plum vibe, but a bit more serious, especially with some of the plots,and I liked Brandy much better as a character.
I think I’ve actually come across a couple of books that mentions it. The most recent that comes to mind is Naughty Brits: an anthology. It is clearly mentioned in the two stories I’ve read thus far.
I can’t really recall others off the top of my head but I do remember reading scenes where it was alluded to, or at least I think it was.
When wading through a sea of purple prose and metaphors it is sometimes difficult to be sure.
The only time I recall it recently mentioned is in Ruby Dixon’s books because they deal with “aliens” from another planet/solar system so the human women sometimes make note, that of course, the guys are intact.
In a historical it would be harder to bring up I think, as modern women from the U.S. would expect circumcision- so seeing something else makes them comment on it. If it’s what everybody expects to see then they probably wouldn’t comment on it.
It’s definitely kind of a big deal here in the U.S.- remember that episode of Sex and The City were Charlotte dated a guy who wasn’t and freaked out. He eventually ends up getting the operation.
I know men who have said they made sure their sons were circumcised because they didn’t want them to be different in the locker room growing up in school and sports. As a woman, growing up in the U.S. (at least at my schools) there was no expectation that girls would strip down in front of other girls. Maybe things are different nowadays but all the girls in my day got changed in the stalls- apart from a few less self conscious ones who might change their shirt or shorts in the open area of the ladies room exposing their underwear at most. There was no nudity involved. From what I understand from guys is that is not the case and as much as women are known for judging each other’s bodies, young guys are equally as brutal at times.
I think there’s also a fair amount of “it’s good for little boys to identify with their dad” thinking too.
“I know men who have said they made sure their sons were circumcised because they didn’t want them to be different in the locker room growing up in school and sports.”
Recently I read the non-fiction book “As Nature Made Him : the boy who was raised as a girl”. It begins with a botched circumcision that burns off a baby’s penis, and the parents, on advice from professionals, decide to have the baby castrated and raised to believe he’s a girl. The book specifically says that the baby’s father wondered what it would be like for a little boy whose friends decide to have a see-who-can-pee-the-farthest contest, if the little boy didn’t have a penis.
Medicine has come a long way about gender. When Dr. Feelgood was training, if doctors encountered an intersex baby, they’d decide immediately after the birth what sex to assign it. Non-consensual surgical intervention was the norm.
Thankfully, this is increasingly no longer usually the case. Today’s medical schools train doctors to wait until children can make the choice themselves.
Medicine has really come a long way in general in terms of notification, privacy and consent. It’s amazing the powers that doctors took upon themselves previously.
The actress Kay Kendall was never told she was dying of leukemia. Her doctors told her husband Rex Harrison and while he cared for her until the end, he and the doctors never told her.
Something similar was a sub-plot in Mad Men where Don’s (ex) wife was dying of cancer and her sister and family decided not to tell her.
I’ve heard keeping information from terminal patients is still a problem in some countries, not so much for paternalistic reasons but because of cultural beliefs of not wanting the patient to be upset or give up hope. Which kind of makes you wonder why you would go to the doctor in the first place if you knew, culturally, you wouldn’t get a straight answer.
My father never knew he was dying of cancer, to the end. This was shortly after Soviet Union ended, so we were still living in that culture. There were beliefs around “not upsetting him”. Or no upsetting me, for that matter – I was studying in the US at the time and my family withheld the news for a month or so, until after an important exam, because they felt it was really important for me to succeed. I understand that they were just trying to do their best in a really difficult situation that was discovered much too late for any intervention. But personally this just meant that I rushed home like crazy at the last moment and still could not really talk to him because he did not understand that he was dying and thought we had forever once he left hospital. In reality we only had a couple of weeks.
It’s difficult to argue with cultural norms, though – my mum was taking advice from the doctors and she wasn’t exactly in the best state to challenge that, either. It’s been over 20 years and a great many things have changed but there’s still a big gap in cultural norms. I think that Western medicine evolved in the right direction there for sure.
I agree it’s incredibly hard to break from cultural norms. I am surprised to read it was your father who didn’t know. In so many cases it’s a woman who is not told. I had thought the assumption was that the man would need to know as he is the person who has to “get affairs in order”.
In any case I’m very sorry for your loss and for any additional stress and confusion you had to deal with. I think it’s very natural for family members undergoing those unbearable circumstances to take the advice of a doctor as they are the experts and “know best”. And I agree that this change is definitely the right direction.
When my mother found out she had cancer, she made it clear that her parents, who lived in another country, were not to be told, because she was afraid that if they heard the news, they would have heart attacks and die. She planned to recover and then break it to them gently.
Well, the cancer turned out to be terminal. And right up till the end, we couldn’t tell her parents, in case they had heart attacks and died. So of course it came as a huge shock to them when we finally had to break the news.
But would you believe it, they didn’t have heart attacks and die.
This issue just came up for us while watching A Place to Call Home. In the 50s and 60s, most physicians believed it was unethical to tell dying patients they were dying. Today, the reverse is true.
I completely agree with you, Dabney. I’m certainly glad things are changing in this regard.
And, fun fact of the day, the first country in the world to ban non-consensual surgical intervention on intersex babies in the absence of medical necessity was Malta, back in 2015. Let’s hope other countries follow suit!
A botched circumcision story scared me profoundly. I read a (Reader’s Digest?) story about how a boy had been successfully raised as a girl when I was a young teen and was horrified. When I had a son in the 1980s in the U.S., my pediatrician was actively relieved not to have to do the circumcision. A couple of moms I knew had older boys whose circumcisions resulted in directional problems when peeing, so my anecdotal database was biased against cutting. When none of my physicians (GP, gynecologist, pediatrician) argued for circumcision, I felt okay with my decision.
When I was debating the issue, I asked my mother about my father — I already knew he had supported having my brothers circumcised because he thought it was healthier if they served in the military and were then sent to the tropics as he had been (none of them joined the military). Anyway, my father was not circumcised, my brothers and husband were, and my son was not. I never heard any ructions about looking like or not looking like fathers, grandfathers, or uncles.
When my family was transferred from the northeast to the rural south, however, my son received a nasty nickname because he did look different (no locker room nudity, just viewing at the urinals). I was very angry about the way male principals and teachers regarded uncircumcised males as strange and were unwilling to intervene in “teasing” that my family had concluded rose to bullying.
I have read some pieces by men who are horrified by circumcision and say it is genital mutilation. I was not comfortable making such a decision for someone who had no input, when I knew things could go wrong. If my son decided to become circumcised, I would not interfere. It’s his body, not mine, and he is well past the age of majority.
And to answer the question originally raised, I have not noticed any mention of foreskins in romance novels. Since I knew circumcision was common in the U.S. but not necessarily in the U.K. or other countries, I kind of assumed this was a matter of authors glossing over details that might stop readers in their tracks, especially British authors who were big sellers in the U.S. Why jerk some readers to a halt in a lovemaking scene that is multipurpose and needs to be carefully paced?
If mentioning foreskins or their lack becomes common, I would suggest that the details be revealed well before pivotal scenes. Also, I thought somewhere I read that condoms have to be put on differently or with more care if there is a foreskin, so there’s that issue to consider if the scene is very anatomically detailed and includes condom use.
Thanks for sharing all this, Still reading, especially the third paragraph from the bottom about how many men feel about this issue. I know I had to duck out of this conversation yesterday because I was getting too emotionally involved and confrontational. So thanks for stating what I wanted to say much more calmly.
As for foreskins in romance novels, I may have run across a few here or there, but nothing that really stood out to me. Just some euphemistic expressions in HR about the heroine noticing the hero’s glans is “moist,” or “slick,” or “smooth,” as I mentioned in a post below.
This is just speculation, but I think there are two major reasons why the foreskin doesn’t get much love in romance:
1) Most romances, at least the category ones, are either published in the US or packaged largely for a US market (correct me if I’m wrong on this; I know there is overseas marketing, but I understand the US market is huge). Given the higher rates of circumcision in the US vs other countries, it makes sense the average American romance author wouldn’t include one. Or maybe a foreign author may not include one if she expected to market to a largely US audience.
2) I think the presence of foreskin also largely depends upon how explicit a romance is. If you have a “subtle” or low-level “warm” sex scene, purple prose or general descriptions are more likely to appear than precise anatomical terminology. For that matter, has anyone ever seen a frenulum in romance?
Interesting enough though, I have read sex scenes in romance that mention the labia- usually as “feminine folds.” (Can’t recall if I’ve ever read about a clitoral hood…) If foreskin in romance sex scenes ever takes off, will we see references to “masculine folds?”
“If mentioning foreskins or their lack becomes common, I would suggest that the details be revealed well before pivotal scenes.”
Having written scads of sex scenes involving foreskins, I don’t think giving the reader a warning beforehand is necessary to keep things from becoming clunky. To me, it’s kind of like how we don’t really need to know the exact color or shape of the heroine’s private parts before the first sex scene. That sort of information can be woven into the text, especially as the hero or heroine looks upon the love interest’s body for the first time.
“Also, I thought somewhere I read that condoms have to be put on differently or with more care if there is a foreskin, so there’s that issue to consider if the scene is very anatomically detailed and includes condom use.”
Yes, I have addressed this in some of my work as well. Although sometimes it’s enough just to mention the hero put on a condom without getting into the extraneous details. It all depends on how explicit the author wants or needs to get for the scene in question. :)
A lot of Annabeth Albert’s heroes have foreskins. Much time is spent describing them.
I guess I’ll have to move up some of her works on the TBR list. I love to see foreskin-positivity in romance. :)
Yes, I was sure I’d read about them in her books – others, too, although I can’t remember specifics.
On the general topic, I am in Central Europe and we find circumcision unusual. Yes, boys need to be taught to wash carefully, and pull back the skin when washing, and as an au pair or nanny or older sister you learn that about tiny boys, and are informed that they can get some skin or other infections if not carefully cleaned there. Slightly different care instructions ;-)
in saunas, where we go both sexes and naked and it is normal, I would say most men are as G made them. Otherwise, I do not have a large sample to tell you about ;-)
On the specific, I remember a few books, one in particular, where the heroine / a female character just loved penises, and had a lot of pleasure in licking etc. and at some point she was thinking – oh how ice, here I can play a bit of “hide & seek” or “ oh, his glans will be extra sensitive, he is not used to so much friction in his underwear”. Was it Maxie in Judith Krantz’s “I’ll take Manhattan”? It was so lovely in the mood it set, and I liked how utterly natural it was to her that both penis versions exist, and she had fun with either. Not sure about which book, though. I can be wildly off the mark.
“Yes, boys need to be taught to wash carefully, and pull back the skin when washing, and as an au pair or nanny or older sister you learn that about tiny boys, and are informed that they can get some skin or other infections if not carefully cleaned there.”
Just as a head’s up, there’s a lot of potentially damaging misinformation out there about retracting foreskin before it’s ready to naturally retract. In babies and young boys, it is fused to the glans sort of like a fingernail. Until it begins to separate naturally, which may not happen until the teen years, it should not be forcibly pulled back as doing so can cause pain, tearing, and infections: https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/care-of-the-intact-penis/.
You wouldn’t think the condition of Louis XVI’s foreskin greatly contributed to the French Revolution, would you? He had one that was too tight when he was erect, making intercourse painful and impossible. When nothing happened in the wedding bed, naturally people assumed it was Marie Antoinette’s fault. She was examined, etc. and her Mother, Maria Theresa of Austria wrote her advice about her duty. Finally, they looked at her young virginal husband and saw the problem which meant that his foreskin needed to be clipped, but he refused. Six sterile years went by when the courtiers and eventually the whole of France laughed at his sexual inability with his beautiful and desirable wife. It was only when her brother came to court was he able to advise Louis who then went through the ordeal, resulting in a number of children, which included two boys (I think one died before the revolution) and IIRC, two daughters.
That is fascinating. Have you read Bonk?
One of my exes had this problem! As an adult, he eventually went to the doctor and they suggested he either have his foreskin removed or he apply cream and routinely stretch it. He didn’t choose circumcision, but it’s still an issue for him. I’ll have to tell him about Louis XVI — he’ll get out a kick out of this.
Somewhat O/T, but I’d like to share a (possibly uniquely American) circumcision story: I once worked with a pregnant woman who elected not to learn the gender of her baby prior to the baby’s birth. She was close to her delivery date when she went for a checkup and the doctor, looking through her file, casually mentioned that she hadn’t signed the circumcision form yet (American male babies are usually circumcised not long after being born). The woman was crushed that, with an offhand reference, she knew she was having a boy and wouldn’t be “surprised” on her delivery day.
That’s a bummer.
Here’s a happier story:
When I was pregnant with my first child in 1991, ultrasounds were rarely performed and, the two times I’d had one, my child was being modest and we couldn’t determine sex which we were happy to know.
A week before I gave birth, my mom–this was her first grandchild–came to stay with us to help with the baby. A close friend was, at the time, finishing up his radiology residency at the hospital my husband was a surgeon at. The friend, John, asked if my mom would like to see her first ultrasound and, of course, she said yes. So we went in on a Sunday afternoon–the baby was born the following Wednesday–and did an one.
This time, in perfect clarity, a penis was visible. I said, “It’s a boy!” John said, “Just remember, it’s possible you’re seeing something else.” I said, “John, I don’t know what you look at, but I see one of those every day and I am damn sure that’s a penis.”
It became a well-told story at the hospital: “Dr. Feelgood’s wife saw an inch long dick and says she’s sees that every day!”
This made me laugh!
Poor Dr. Feelgood, lol.
Thankfully, he is extremely confident in his masculinity….
We didn’t want to know the sex of our 3rd child and when I had an ultrasound because I was a week overdue, I asked not to be told. (We had a boy and a girl at home already so it was just for the surprise value.) Any-hoo, part way through the ultrasound the technician went from using gender neutral pronouns to “he.” The tech didn’t mean to, it just slipped out. We had a good laugh about it. My son was born three days later. :-)
I was wondering if AAR was ever going to broach this topic, and I am so pleased you have done so respectfully. Too often, foreskins in the United States are treated as a joke rather than a perfectly natural, healthy part of the male anatomy. It has surprised me as well that so few of them show up specifically in HR or even CR that takes place outside of the states, so thanks for pointing out this odd omission. Maybe it’s because so many romances are published in the US so editors aren’t looking for foreskins in sex scenes?
I make no secret of the fact that I am an intactivist. I believe strongly in defending genital integrity for both sexes and feel quite angry when people- typically Americans- dismissively say, “Oh, it’s just a little snip” or “Oh, it’s just a little flap of skin.” Uh uhn. The adult foreskin is loaded with enough nerve endings to stretch over a 3 x 5 card and protects the glans to prevent keratinization just to name two benefits. Especially when you consider widespread circumcision became a practice because Kellogg (yeah, the cereal guy) touted it as a method to prevent masturbation, modern doctors don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to perpetuating this horrific butchery on newborns. (As for the whole “cleanliness” argument- which never came into play until people started questioning religious motives- like many here have said, some 70-80% of the world’s men are intact, most without issue.)
I know I’ve caused some rows on AAR before, but it sounds like a lot of us here are worldly enough to understand circumcision is (thankfully!) not the global standard. I also know I’ve said some controversial political things about not getting heavily involved- if at all- in various activist movements. But I have taken a strong stance for intactivism in my erotica. Without shoving talking points in the reader’s face, I make sure every one of my male characters is intact unless there is a religious, historical, or cultural reason for him not to be. In short, I treat foreskins for the default that they are in most of the world and should be for the US. Sure, I’m just one self-published smut author, but I feel like I’m doing my part to normalize the intact male penis to a largely American audience. And I sincerely wish other romance and erotica authors would do the same. Besides, there are so many sexy things an erotica author (or steamy romance author) can do with foreskins, whether in m/m or m/f. A lot of writers are missing some nice opportunities to incorporate a fun and lovely but sadly maligned body part!
P.S. Shameless plug alert for an example of the uses of foreskin in erotica/romance: Besides the vast sensations and aesthetics of the foreskin in a sex scene, I did write one m/m erotica piece that actually required foreskins- “Dock the Halls: A Christmas Story.” And now you can scold me for having such a punny title. :) Anyway, take note m/m writers! The m/m world could use a lot more docking…
Well, you are welcome to your opinion! This is AAR.
It’s not one I share! And I say that as the wife of a surgeon who read everything he could and talked to pediatricians, urologists, etc… before we snipped our sons.
We made the same decision based on research and on that fact my father had to be snipped as an adult due to recurrent infections, and he was a fastidious man. I do wish I’d thought to ask him if sex was any different after the operation–more or less pleasurable. I know he and my mom chose to have my brother snipped,so Dad obviously didn’t have any strong negative feelings about it.
Just FYI:
“Since 2005, 3 randomized trials have evaluated male circumcision for prevention of sexually transmitted infections. The trials found that circumcision decreases human immunodeficiency virus acquisition by 53% to 60%, herpes simplex virus type 2 acquisition by 28% to 34%, and human papillomavirus prevalence by 32% to 35% in men. Among female partners of circumcised men, bacterial vaginosis was reduced by 40%, and Trichomonas vaginalis infection was reduced by 48%. Genital ulcer disease was also reduced among males and their female partners.”
from Male Circumcision for the Prevention of Acquisition and Transmission of Sexually Transmitted InfectionsArch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2010 Jan; 164(1): 78–84.
Not sexy, but perhaps worth including in the discussion.
In this, like so many things, I think what’s right for your family is what’s right for you. I live in the US where it’s the norm. I have literally only seen one uncircumcised male in my life and he was four.
I can completely see that, in a different culture, I would not have wanted this for my sons.
I would be curious if those studies were made in the US and whether Europe has the higher incidences of the topics / illnesses you mention above.
I do not see the topic discussed much here, and I rarely see or hear about circumcision in boys – except in religious context.
but I admit to not being so curious that I would start to research it myself, so please do not make any efforts!
Those HIV studies were performed in Africa under dubious circumstances. My previous comment to this is still waiting approval because of providing multiple links on the topic, but a good summary of the study’s biases and problems is available here with citations: https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/alleged-medical-benefits/hivaids/.
I have emailed you about your comment.
Oof! Just read your e-mail and responded. :)
My opinion of circumcision as an Ob/Gyn in the US (who performs circs). Circumcision is strongly cultural and most parents in the US have it performed. There is good medical evidence that in areas with high HIV rates, circumcision will reduce transmission. Other than that, I consider it an elective cosmetic procedure. Some state insurance plans will not pay for circumcision since it is considered elective.
Also remember, with every surgical procedure there is the possibility of a bad outcome. I have seen and heard about several complications after circumcision. Thankfully, complications are rare.
I bet if you ask women if sex is different between men who are circumcised versus those who aren’t, they won’t be able to tell the difference. I can’t answer for men, since I don’t take care of them!
One story that highlights the cultural differences: A patient delivered a male infant. Her husband was British and uncircumcised. They didn’t want their son circumcised. Every time she had an assessment by a nurse, she was asked if she signed the consent for circumcision. My patient was scared to let her son out of her sight for fear that he would be circumcised since it is so routine!
Thanks for sharing your opinion as an Ob/Gyn, Minerva. Dabney and I had a lovely private chat about some of my harsh remarks on this topic, so I want to assure you that I’m not replying to your post to argue. I just wanted to share an anecdote related to the incident you mentioned:
“Every time she had an assessment by a nurse, she was asked if she signed the consent for circumcision. My patient was scared to let her son out of her sight for fear that he would be circumcised since it is so routine!”
I have heard similar examples of mothers being pressured to consent to circumcision, sometimes immediately after giving birth. Although routine infant male circumcision is against my beliefs, I think you and I would probably agree there is a huge difference between a well-informed parent who has been given all the facts and figures on both sides versus hounding someone when they are at their most vulnerable. One specific incident I have in mind is a mother I knew about who gave birth to a son- I believe this was before widespread ultrasound- and the doctors and nurses pretty much ganged up on her minutes after delivery to have him circumcised. No pros and cons given, just a sense of urgency that it had to be done. The woman, understandably exhausted and out of it from the extreme stress and pain of giving birth, agreed- and then sobbed with deep regret when they returned her son.
Regardless of what anyone thinks of circumcision, I think most of us would agree that this sort of pressure was unethical on the grounds it was definitely not informed consent- especially when the mother was likely to have been under the influence of painkillers and therefore couldn’t make a fully lucid decision.
I would just say that, for medical things, individual stories are interesting but not necessarily predictive.
Again, every culture has their own norms and it’s my sense that in this, as in most things, most of us make the best decisions we can for ourselves and for those we love.
Since most parents know the sex of the child prior to delivery, I do feel that they have discussions about circumcision.
Before I can perform a circumcision in the US: a parent needs to give informed consent, the baby needs to pee, the pediatrician needs to do an exam. Circs are usually done when the baby is at least 24 hours old.
There are times that the pediatrician asks to delay circumcision. Circs can be done in the office with minimal complications up to 30 days old. Anything more than that needs to be done by a pediatric urologist.
Just in case anyone is curious….if the circ is not covered by insurance, it usually costs $300.
We had our kids at a teaching hospital and all three sons were circumcised by pediatric urologists. When the first son was done, 29 years ago, it wasn’t the norm to numb the baby up but the urologists did so.
Times do change!
I recently listened to the audios for the first three Winston Brothers books by Penny Reid. I am assuming all the brothers are uncircumcised. In the first book, the heroine spends a lot of time thinking about the hero’s uncircumcised penis. I don’t recall it really being mentioned in the other two books,
Well, now I need to correct myself. I checked the text in the book, and it says circumscribed. I must have heard it wrong when I listened to audio.
Which begs the question, what is a “circumscribed” penis?
Sorry. Typo on my part. Should be circumcised. It comes up 10 times in the kindle edition, which is why it stood out to me. Somehow I heard ‘uncircumcised’ each time it was mentioned in the audio. My brain must have been playing tricks on me.
It’s probably an indication of how rare references to circumcised (or not) penises are in romance that I can only remember two instances where the situation involving the hero’s foreskin (or lack thereof) was a plot point: in Jennifer Blake’s old-skool THE STORM AND THE SPLENDOR (which involves the attempt by the Creole French in Louisiana to liberate Napoleon from his exile), the hero & heroine are taken captive by a sheikh. The heroine is moved to the harem while the hero becomes the sheikh’s advisor…and, in order to show his loyalty, agrees to be circumcised. This happens off-page, but when h&h are reunited, they have a rather drily humorous exchange about his “condition.” In contemporary romance, Sarina Bowen’s KEEPSAKE features a hero who was raised in a religious cult and is not circumcised. He’s also a virgin and the heroine is more sexually experienced than he is—when she sees him naked for the first time, she notes that he is “uncut,” but I don’t think anything further about his foreskin appears in the book.
I will say that when it comes to the condition of the penis in romance novels, I’m with St. Paul who wrote in his epistle to the Galatians: “It doesn’t matter whether we have been circumcised or not. What counts is whether we have been transformed into a new creation.” (Galatians 6:15, New Living Translation.) I knew one day all my years of Church attendance would pay off!
Pamela Clare has made a point of this in some of her books – I think Seduction Game, and the first of her current series with the interchangeable titles and chests on the covers. Possibly others as well. I really don’t care if a hero is circumcised or not, and would rather have this left to the reader’s imagination.
This! I also would rather have this left to the reader’s imagination. Not least because I am from Europe, and I had partners from various European countries, but I have never seen a “cut” penis in real life. I always find it so weird that the US has a different “default” than I am used to, it would take me right out of the story if it was mentioned.
Also, there isn’t really much to say about it from a story-telling perspective. I never take particular notice of it (well, that’s because it’s always been there, I would probably notice a lot if it was missing ). I guess you can think of it in a way like say the labia minora, it’s a bit of skin that everyone has, and it looks different for each person, but in itself it doesn’t add a lot to the experience. Not that I am an expert in sex scenes or anything, probably a good author could make something good out of it. But still I can’t say I miss having it (or the lack of it thereof) mentioned on the page.
Whether the foreskin appears in the sex scene or not depends on how explicit/hot the sex scenes are as well. I’ve read only . So when I write sex scenes, I do what you mention and leave it up to the reader’s imagination.
Accidentally posted before I could finish. I meant to add, I’ve read only one sex scene that mentioned the perineum, even though that’s an erogenous zone too.
“I’ve read only one sex scene that mentioned the perineum, even though that’s an erogenous zone too.”
Uh oh. Was that in one of my smut stories? ;) Honestly, after doing this for about a year, I’m surprised how much explicit sex scenes in books I’ve read leave out or completely ignore. It’s like some others have said here before, sex scenes in m/f category romance tend to have a strict, linear progression from kissing to oral to PIV. Other practices like heavy petting, massage, role play, etc. hardly ever come into play. I’m not saying they never do, but I’ve found Harlequins in particular to be a bit… standard in their presentation (can’t recall any instances of “wild” sex positions either- everyone seems to be stuck in a loop of three or four standbys, if that). Anyone else agree?
The perineum is mentioned a lot in m/m contemporary but often/usually called the ‘taint’.
I know this because I had to google what a taint was! I had never heard the perineum referred to as a taint before.
This scene from Weeds is everything….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwIxkzQxppg
Snort!!!!!!!!!
O.M.G. Too funny.
Circumcision isn’t the norm in the UK as far as I’m aware. I’ve definitely come across mentions of foreskins in m/m more than a few times, but I can’t remember any specific titles. If I do, I’ll come back!
Less common today but much more performed in the past in the UK. Older men are more likely to have had it done. One article I looked at said it has dropped from 35% in the 1930s to around 8% now; these are UK figures only, much higher percentages in the US.
Interesting article on the differences between countries’ medical recommendations.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/tre.742
Interesting topic! The only romance I’ve read which even alluded to the foreskin was a Grace Burrowes book where the hero had been tortured by being forcibly circumcised.
I’m also reminded of when I was seven years old and read the Bible for the first time. I came across the part where David has to collect X number of foreskins to prove he’s worthy to marry the king’s daughter, but I had no idea what the foreskin was. So I thought it was the skin over your forehead, and I imagined David partially scalping all those Philistines.
6.30 AM and my first chuckle of the day, Marian!! And, er, no I can’t recall a mention of a foreskin in a romance novel or, indeed, any novel I’ve read. Interesting subject and I await further comments.