Just a Little Off the Top

There are many things to write from the past few days. I could discuss the trivial: Like my disappointment with X-Men III (I can still taste the suck). Or I could discuss the chilling: Like the anniversary of AIDS and the fact that we have a government just as indifferent as we did 25 years ago. Or I could talk about the evil: Like Bush’s attempt to turn loving couples into a threat to national security and good, clean heteros everywhere. These things all have their due.

Instead, though, sometimes it’s good to think about less lofty issues. Even I can get tired of the gravitas. We all know that GayProf has a tendency to over think things sometimes. “No, GayProf,” I hear you saying, “You are just an introspective guy. We await your ascent into the heavens where you will be seated at the right hand of our goddess. We believe in the one and true GayProf.” Okay, maybe you don’t say that last bit – except on holy days.

Let's think about a less serious issue that still occupies gay men’s thoughts quite often in the U.S. This is not a major issue. Actually, I think it’s such a minor issue that I am surprised that it gets so much attention. I just don’t quite get some gay men's quasi-obsession over circumcised verses uncircumcised.

Having lost my foreskin long before the soft spot on my head closed up, I can’t really talk about the benefits or drawbacks of being uncut first-hand. Of course, being a historian and all, I can mention that one of the reasons that medical doctors promoted circumcision in the 20th-century U.S. was because having foreskin makes it much easier to masturbate. Bastards.

I remember distinctly the first time that I saw an uncircumsied penis. It was my best friend from second grade and I marveled at the difference. Still, then (as now) I was just happy to see a penis of any type and didn’t really put too much effort in cataloging the differences.

In my limited adult experience, I have had some valuable hands-on time as a participant-observer with both of these two options. Both the hard-top and convertible penis seem like they each have equal pluses and minuses.



Maybe I am just indiscriminate desperate slutty open-minded, but my concerns with a potential partner’s penis are pretty minimal. Basically, all that I am looking for is a cock that can have an erection and toss a load without heroic efforts. What? Hey – The Center of Gravitas ain’t a blog for children. Go somewhere else of merry-go-rounds and bumper-cars.

Yet, many gay personal ads out there state explicit requirements for one option or another. Some gay personal sites even have a prearranged check box to indicate your foreskin’s current status. Are people really turning down random sex dating men based on this tiny distinction? Does having or not having foreskin make up for other attributes in your man? “Yeah,” one can imagine somebody saying, “My man is missing two fingers, hasn’t held a steady job since 1994, is hooked on tina, and likes two or three guys as well as me. What’s important, though, is that his cock is still in its original packaging.”

Again – I am not saying this desire for one or the other is wrong. Whatever gets you going is fine by me. If only foreskin will do it for you, that’s fare. Dock away.

If you just can’t handle the different taste of an uncut penis (and they do taste different), that’s cool with me as well. Whatever works for you. GayProf doesn’t judge -- on this issue.

I can understand having a preference for cut or uncut, but making it a deal breaker? Really? I prefer drinking TaB over Diet Coke, for instance. If Anderson Cooper offered me a Diet Coke in his bedroom, however, you better believe I am going to drink it.

Unlike gay men, you rarely hear straight women express a firm-line stance on this issue. If questioned, they might make their druthers known. Quite frankly, it seems that many straight women avoid having to look at a penis very much at all. They don’t want direct eye contact with that mess, from their perspective. Cut or uncut, therefore, is just not on the top of their list.

What does seem to be on the top of straight women’s lists? The guy needs to be taller than them. It’s true. Sorry hetero guys, if you are short, you just aren’t making the list. A straight guy could be toady-ugly, but if he is over six-foot, straight women will consider him a bonus-find because they could wear heels. I'll leave it to the hets to debate the pros and cons of this issue. I am just observing.

Some gay men, though, seem to spend a great deal of energy thinking about the foreskin/non-foreskin issue. There are entire sex parties devoted to only uncircumsied guys (no cutsies allowed). I guess I just don’t like the idea of excluding people. Everybody wants to be invited to the party.

I have also met many gay men who bemoan their cut status. An entire minor industry exists of products that try to “regrow” one’s foreskin. Most of these contraptions seem to involve stretching the skin on the shaft of the penis (!). This sounds both painful and incoveinent. Does it really matter that much? Really?

Until 1980, almost 70 percent of male infants had their foreskin removed at birth in the U.S. for non-religious reasons. Even today, when circumcision has started to lose favor, over half of infants still have the procedure. It seems like these men just need to get over it. Your foreskin is gone. It's not coming back to you. Let it go.



It’s not just gay guys, though, who have some psychological issues over the turtle-neck. As much as many gay men eroticize foreskin, some straight guys seem to fear it (even those who are uncircumscised themselves). You often hear straight fathers talking about their reasons for having their sons trimmed up. They usually offer, “I want him to look like all the other boys in the locker room.” What exactly was going on in these men’s teenaged locker rooms? And why wasn’t I ever asked to join in on the compare and contrast moment when I was young?

I once had a straight-male acquaintance from Europe who spent part of his young life in the states. He actually was embarrassed by his foreskin even as an adult. When questioned directly about still having a flip-cap, he disavowed it. He only used the stalls in men’s rooms. Now, I never really asked what happened in his youth (we just weren’t that tight), but, damn, there was a man who didn’t want his penis to be different from the others around him.

It all reminds me that men are not as secure in our bodies as we are lead to believe. During the height of the feminist movement, women spent some serious time discussing their bodies and coming to self-acceptance in a conscious way. I wonder if men (both queer and non-queer) wouldn’t benefit from similar introspection. More than just contemplating if we have enough precious inches, we could use some greater security in using what we got. I am not saying that I am going to draft a new play entitled the Penis Monologues (Although...). Still, let’s work it out boys. We have what we have – Be happy.