Correct me where I’m wrong in this analogy. Let’s say a penis is like an arm, and the glans (head of the penis) is like a fist. The cuff of the sleeve is permanently attached to the wrist. When flaccid, it’s like the fist is withdrawn into the sleeve, which doubles over itself (foreskin) and covers up most of the fist. Correct so far?
So, if this foreskin is cut, what keeps the “sleeve” connected to the “cuff” or the “wrist”? Sutures?
I’ve always wondered this myself. I don’t think they give stitches when babies are circumsized, or at least I’ve never seen stitches on a baby boy before.
And in a related question, how is that a circumcised penis and an uncircumcised penis look virtually the same when erect? Shouldn’t either the uncircumcised penis have a baggy amount of extra skin along the shaft, or shouldn’t the skin of the circumcised penis be unbearably tight?
Because a penis is muscle covered with skin. If you cut the skin all the way around, then wouldn’t it need to somehow be reconnected so that the underlying structure isn’t exposed? This is what I don’t understand.
I was circumcised not so long ago to cure a case of phimosis.
I don’t fully understand the confusion though. Why would there need to be anything to ‘hold the skin together’? The foreskin is just excess skin that protects the head.
An uncircumsized penis, when erect, can have looser skin than an uncircumsized one, if the foreskin is pulled back onto the shaft. But it can also remain covering the head when erect.
The diagram is incorrect. It shows a red cut line that would leave two otherwise unattached layers of skin. The foreskin is fused into a single piece of tissue even though it has two sides. When you cut through it, you can’t peel it apart like two pieces of paper. It’s removed just beyond the point where this “cuff” attaches to the base of the glans.
Then how can it be pulled back without tearing it internally? If it’s fused together where the blue arrows are, it’s at that location permanently, and can’t retract.
I thought only the foreskin was pulled back, rather like rolling up one’s sleeve. (Full disclosure: I’m female and have never… “dealt” with a foreskin.)
Going by Chief Pedant’s explanation, it’s more like having an extra-long, thick cuticle at the base of your fingernails, and trimming that off. When you do that, you don’t expose underlaying tissues, just deeper levels of the epidermis.
Here’s a painful analogy: a foreskin is a lot like lips. Skin on the outside mucous membrane on the inside. The head is like your gums. The foreskin connects to the frenulum like the inside of your lip connects to the base of your gum. When you pull on the skin of your chin, you expose your teeth. (I just tried and it works best if you pull hard on your cheek skin, around the jawbone. My bottom lip curled back, much like the foreskin does during an erection.)
And the pain: a circumcision is like cutting off your lips (and cheeks too!) where they connect to your gums, exposing your teeth and gums. All you’re left with is a circular scar. An adult requires stitches but baby skin heals fast enough on its own.
If the foreskin is removed beyond the point where this “cuff” attaches to the base of the glans, then how does the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis virtually disappear into one long continuous skin covering when erect?
What’s inaccurate about Chief’s description? It describes accurately many of the hundreds I’ve examined on adult males in my career.
Or do you agree with him that the drawing is not accurate?
BTW, I’ve also done a few hundred infant circs, and probably a dozen adult ones in my career. My best analogy is converting a turtleneck sweater (with a really small opening for the head) into a standard sweater with a small oval collar. In infants, it’ll heal just fine without suturing, but in adults sutures are needed to minimize scarring.
