Circumcision Scars and Aesthetic Concerns

Abstract

Abstract In North America, it is fairly common to imagine the uncircumcised, or the intact, penis as ‘ugly’. Numerous examples can be found in popular cultures that refer to the uncircumcised penis and its foreskin as abject, disgusting, dirty, etc. As such, the circumcised penis has become something of a norm in North America, especially the United States where in the words of one scholar, ‘circumcision is consistent with American notions of good parenting’. Likewise, the foreskin has seemingly disappeared form medical textbooks, as noted by J.R. Taylor, A.P. Lockwood and A.J. Taylor: ‘The current tendency to eliminate the prepuce from anatomy textbooks reflects the popular emphasis on the glans; perhaps the wrinkling and pleating of the retracted prepuce, like unwanted hair, is an affront to good taste or simply superfluous to requirements.’ What all this assumes, of course, is that the circumcised men are aesthetically superior and that all circumcisions will necessarily result in this aesthetic improvement – in this logic, then, there are never any mistakes or accidents. However, as has been well documented, circumcision complications do arise, and sometimes they leave the penis with scars, which can become an aesthetic concern; indeed, the correction, as it were, can become a new problem. This chapter thus considers the (possible) ugliness of the circumcised penis.