What do you think?
Rate this book
Uncut: A Cultural Analysis of the Foreskin
Uncut explores the significance of the foreskin in contemporary culture
The “uncut” penis is viewed by some as attractive or erotic, and by others as ugly or undesirable. Secular parents of male infants worry about whether or not the foreskin should be removed so their little boy can grow up to “look like dad” or to avoid imagined bullying in the locker room. Medical experts and public health organizations argue back and forth about whether circumcision is medically necessary, while “intactivists” advocate that removing an infant’s foreskin without their consent is mutilation.
A Cultural Analysis of the Foreskin takes an interdisciplinary approach to understanding the foreskin and its contentious position in contemporary Anglo-American culture. From language to art, from religion to medicine and public health, Uncut is a provocative book that asks us to ask ourselves what we know and don’t know about this seemingly small piece of skin.
Drawing on all these threads, Jonathan A. Allan leads us through the history and cultural construction of the foreskin—from Michelangelo’s David to parenting manuals, from nineteenth-century panic over masturbation to foreskin restoration—to ultimately what is the future of the foreskin?
The “uncut” penis is viewed by some as attractive or erotic, and by others as ugly or undesirable. Secular parents of male infants worry about whether or not the foreskin should be removed so their little boy can grow up to “look like dad” or to avoid imagined bullying in the locker room. Medical experts and public health organizations argue back and forth about whether circumcision is medically necessary, while “intactivists” advocate that removing an infant’s foreskin without their consent is mutilation.
A Cultural Analysis of the Foreskin takes an interdisciplinary approach to understanding the foreskin and its contentious position in contemporary Anglo-American culture. From language to art, from religion to medicine and public health, Uncut is a provocative book that asks us to ask ourselves what we know and don’t know about this seemingly small piece of skin.
Drawing on all these threads, Jonathan A. Allan leads us through the history and cultural construction of the foreskin—from Michelangelo’s David to parenting manuals, from nineteenth-century panic over masturbation to foreskin restoration—to ultimately what is the future of the foreskin?
- GenresNonfiction
352 pages, Hardcover
Published November 5, 2024
4 people are currently reading
67 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
December 12, 2024
Uncut is an extremely in-depth read about the foreskin, mainly in America. The author is a very bright academic, and that was really the biggest issue in this book. There were a lot of incredibly interesting analyses made along the way that would sometimes come off as too dense for an average reader. The way this book is presented (by the cover, at least) this book may attract a reader that is looking for something less in depth than this one. The author worked tirelessly to avoid focusing on circumcision and instead focus on the foreskin itself, but this is a somewhat futile endeavor. People only care about the foreskin because of its tendency to be snipped. I think the author's academic-like prose made this book feel longer than it needed to be. I learned a lot, and I will carry a lot from this book going forward, but I don't know that I would necessarily recommend it to others.
Than you to Netgalley and University of Regina Press for an ARC in exchange for an honest review.
Than you to Netgalley and University of Regina Press for an ARC in exchange for an honest review.
March 24, 2025
Initially a gag gift from a friend - turned out to be an interesting afternoon spent learning everything and anything about a part of the body very much neglected
April 26, 2024
For men around the world, circumcision is a sensitive issue. Is it only a religious marker, an aesthetic choice, or a medical necessity? The questions remain open, and Allan gives a quick, but thorough introduction to the foreskin frenzy. He refers to his book as an "intervention", standing in the middle of a longstanding debate over a couple inches of loose flesh. It strikes me more as a mediating attempt than an intervention, however. Allan covers both sides; why do some people cut their pink turtlenecks off, while others leave it intact? He goes over the history of the procedure, starting from time immemorial, and moving through to modernity. Never falling on either side of the skin scissors, Allan is content to present an overview and critique each side when due. Does the foreskin really protect you from AIDS? (Spoiler: no) Is an uncircumcised penis more sensitive? (Spoiler: Maybe?) The final effort provides a snapshot of modern sentiments, scientific research and suggestions on moving forward. If you needed a sex manual encyclopedia covering the foreskin, this could be your start! Allan, admittedly, doesn't present any conclusions; his book is an analysis, as the subtitle suggests. He does occasionally let this guise slip, but he gives both sides their fair shake.
To the writing -- Allan is clearly an academic, and I think the book could have worked better if he removed the academic jargon. By this, I mean the academic tradition of taking multiple pages to tell your reader about your research practices, sources, and biases. Not a bad habit, but it interferes with the reading of a book meant to be popular science. Allen occasionally let's his academic guard down and realizes the comedic joy that can be had in his subject, such as, "...the foreskin finds itself between a rock and a hard place." His first chapter, as well, displays his writing chops. If you can get over Allan's constant reminders that he is an academic, this book is a terrific introduction to the matter of circumcision. Does it contribute to the future of foreskin, as Allan seems to want? Only time will tell, but I am sceptical. In order to contribute to his future, this work would have had to be more than a review, making actual claims. The one area it did this was in suggesting more work should be done on sensitivity. So perhaps.
My thanks to NetGalley, the publisher, and the author for the free ARC.
To the writing -- Allan is clearly an academic, and I think the book could have worked better if he removed the academic jargon. By this, I mean the academic tradition of taking multiple pages to tell your reader about your research practices, sources, and biases. Not a bad habit, but it interferes with the reading of a book meant to be popular science. Allen occasionally let's his academic guard down and realizes the comedic joy that can be had in his subject, such as, "...the foreskin finds itself between a rock and a hard place." His first chapter, as well, displays his writing chops. If you can get over Allan's constant reminders that he is an academic, this book is a terrific introduction to the matter of circumcision. Does it contribute to the future of foreskin, as Allan seems to want? Only time will tell, but I am sceptical. In order to contribute to his future, this work would have had to be more than a review, making actual claims. The one area it did this was in suggesting more work should be done on sensitivity. So perhaps.
My thanks to NetGalley, the publisher, and the author for the free ARC.
May 6, 2024
I picked up another book recently on the subject of circumcision, which, first of all, I DNF-ed because it was poorly written, and two, it was focused on intactivism as opposed to an overview of the subject and issues. In comparison, Allan’s book gave me exactly what I was looking for in trying to understand this subject better and more thoroughly. Although this is an academic text, I found the text to still be fairly accessible, and Allan’s writing is concise while still retaining thoroughness and nuance.
I could feel Allan’s struggle to keep his focus on the foreskin (the precise subject of his book) while the specter of circumcision lurks behind every sentence. The foreskin is only interesting to us because of its disappearing act, so to speak. Thus trying to talk about something that is interesting for its lack of presence is hard to do without discussing the process that eliminates it from view. But I found myself persuaded by Allan’s argumentation and evidence presentation, even when I was resistant to his points (a resistance I will fully admit was due to my own pre- and misconceptions).
Allan’s stated goal is to write an archive of the foreskin, tracing the foreskin through many different media for different audiences to explore all the different ways people engage with the foreskin and why. What are the stakes and anxieties of the discussions of the foreskin, and how are those played out in AMAB individuals’ bodies? He examined parenting manuals, sex manuals, intactivist literature, and classical and contemporary art, among others, to facilitate this discussion. Even though he covers such a broad range of topics, Allan is always careful to explicitly state that his arguments should under no circumstances be taken as antisemitic, Islamaphobic, or otherwise disparaging of religious practices or even cultural practices. He is not “taking a side” on the issue of circumcision; his goal is to present some of the main ways the foreskin has been discussed in North American contemporary media (he’s Canadian, but American cultural mores heavily influence Canada, so realistically he primarily analyzed works from the US).
I have never been very interested in men’s and masculinity studies (I have a degree in women’s studies, after all), but I do think the field is important to show how patriarchy and compulsory heterosexuality impact men in negative and potentially traumatic ways. The reach of feminism has been expanding to an anti-patriarchy movement, critiquing all of the ways that patriarchal systems and structures hurt everyone, including the white cismen the system privileges. This is not to make the argument men are suffering from their male privilege to a greater degree than women are suffering under patriarchal oppression but to note that the system as a whole is damaging to mental and physical health. The manosphere and men’s rights activist groups have really done a disservice to men in co-opting useful terms and hiding serious issues under misogynistic garbage to the point where actual problems men are facing in our current culture are difficult to discuss without sounding misogynistic at points. I found my hackles rising at some points in Allan’s book because of my previous experiences with people talking about some of the issues in his book; they are usually presented in the context of men trying to argument that the world actually operates on “female privilege” and men are the truly disadvantaged ones in our society.
I hope that men reading this book or men contemplating these issues and their relationship to their circumcision status can develop a level of empathy for women who have medical procedures denied them or forced upon them because of their gender or who have had their stories of trauma dismissed because of their gender. All things which were discussed in testimonies from men within this book. I hope that, ultimately, this book can be used to bring men and women together to understand the problem is the patriarchal hegemony we live under that forces us from birth to conform to certain standards for gender that are also impossible to perfectly attain.
I could feel Allan’s struggle to keep his focus on the foreskin (the precise subject of his book) while the specter of circumcision lurks behind every sentence. The foreskin is only interesting to us because of its disappearing act, so to speak. Thus trying to talk about something that is interesting for its lack of presence is hard to do without discussing the process that eliminates it from view. But I found myself persuaded by Allan’s argumentation and evidence presentation, even when I was resistant to his points (a resistance I will fully admit was due to my own pre- and misconceptions).
Allan’s stated goal is to write an archive of the foreskin, tracing the foreskin through many different media for different audiences to explore all the different ways people engage with the foreskin and why. What are the stakes and anxieties of the discussions of the foreskin, and how are those played out in AMAB individuals’ bodies? He examined parenting manuals, sex manuals, intactivist literature, and classical and contemporary art, among others, to facilitate this discussion. Even though he covers such a broad range of topics, Allan is always careful to explicitly state that his arguments should under no circumstances be taken as antisemitic, Islamaphobic, or otherwise disparaging of religious practices or even cultural practices. He is not “taking a side” on the issue of circumcision; his goal is to present some of the main ways the foreskin has been discussed in North American contemporary media (he’s Canadian, but American cultural mores heavily influence Canada, so realistically he primarily analyzed works from the US).
I have never been very interested in men’s and masculinity studies (I have a degree in women’s studies, after all), but I do think the field is important to show how patriarchy and compulsory heterosexuality impact men in negative and potentially traumatic ways. The reach of feminism has been expanding to an anti-patriarchy movement, critiquing all of the ways that patriarchal systems and structures hurt everyone, including the white cismen the system privileges. This is not to make the argument men are suffering from their male privilege to a greater degree than women are suffering under patriarchal oppression but to note that the system as a whole is damaging to mental and physical health. The manosphere and men’s rights activist groups have really done a disservice to men in co-opting useful terms and hiding serious issues under misogynistic garbage to the point where actual problems men are facing in our current culture are difficult to discuss without sounding misogynistic at points. I found my hackles rising at some points in Allan’s book because of my previous experiences with people talking about some of the issues in his book; they are usually presented in the context of men trying to argument that the world actually operates on “female privilege” and men are the truly disadvantaged ones in our society.
I hope that men reading this book or men contemplating these issues and their relationship to their circumcision status can develop a level of empathy for women who have medical procedures denied them or forced upon them because of their gender or who have had their stories of trauma dismissed because of their gender. All things which were discussed in testimonies from men within this book. I hope that, ultimately, this book can be used to bring men and women together to understand the problem is the patriarchal hegemony we live under that forces us from birth to conform to certain standards for gender that are also impossible to perfectly attain.
December 27, 2024
I was very excited to read this book, as I'd found some of Jonathan A. Allan's academic work on the topic quite interesting. While a number of cultural studies of circumcision in the US have been published, it's much rarer to find someone writing about the foreskin itself.
To begin with, in the introduction, Allan mentions the oddity that circumcision is treated as a status of the person with the penis rather than the penis itself: while we would talk about someone's ears being pierced, or their arm being broken, or a toe having been amputated, it is much more the norm to refer to someone as "circumcised" or "uncircumcised" than to say that they have a "circumcised penis" or "uncircumcised penis." This is a distinction I had already come to make about myself: as a trans woman who is unhappy that her penis was circumcised when she was an infant, I much prefer to describe my penis than my "self" as "circumcised." However, this book is the first time I have seen that distinction even mentioned in print.
Much of the book consists of a lengthy review of the literature on circumcision in Anglophone and North American culture: a review that was not entirely new to me—I have read many of the same books and academic sources he cites—but one that I imagine would be extremely illuminating to most readers, and that I found interesting because of how he synthesizes and analyzes some of the sources.
One topic that he emphasizes in his review of the literature is the degree to which parenting books, baby manuals, and even sex guides published in North America take pains to indicate that circumcision status purportedly doesn't really matter and is just a personal choice for parents that shouldn't affect anything much, unless it's religiously required, of course. While writers in non-circumcising societies tend to take for granted that the foreskin is a natural body part that it would make no sense to remove without a specific medical indication, and most societies where circumcision is a cultural or religious practice treat it explicitly as such, North American society finds itself in a strange middle ground. While Allan argues persuasively that North American circumcision is fundamentally a cultural practice, it is treated as a medical one, both by the medical community and by society at large. This creates an odd situation in which public discourse about foreskins treats them as worthless (so as to avoid upsetting the majority of men with circumcised penises) while not explicitly identifying their removal as a cultural or religious necessity unless one happens to be Jewish or perhaps Muslim. Instead, we have a society where the foreskin and its removal are clearly culturally significant, but this significance is generally not openly acknowledged.
The later chapters, on intactivism and foreskin restoration are disappointingly short, but this is likely unavoidable, given how little research there has been on these topics, and these sections still have some interest, especially as he tries to provide balanced coverage, noting that intactivists have legitimate points while also discussing the ways in which the present-day intactivist movement is disturbingly intertwined with antisemitic and "men's rights activist" ideas.
To begin with, in the introduction, Allan mentions the oddity that circumcision is treated as a status of the person with the penis rather than the penis itself: while we would talk about someone's ears being pierced, or their arm being broken, or a toe having been amputated, it is much more the norm to refer to someone as "circumcised" or "uncircumcised" than to say that they have a "circumcised penis" or "uncircumcised penis." This is a distinction I had already come to make about myself: as a trans woman who is unhappy that her penis was circumcised when she was an infant, I much prefer to describe my penis than my "self" as "circumcised." However, this book is the first time I have seen that distinction even mentioned in print.
Much of the book consists of a lengthy review of the literature on circumcision in Anglophone and North American culture: a review that was not entirely new to me—I have read many of the same books and academic sources he cites—but one that I imagine would be extremely illuminating to most readers, and that I found interesting because of how he synthesizes and analyzes some of the sources.
One topic that he emphasizes in his review of the literature is the degree to which parenting books, baby manuals, and even sex guides published in North America take pains to indicate that circumcision status purportedly doesn't really matter and is just a personal choice for parents that shouldn't affect anything much, unless it's religiously required, of course. While writers in non-circumcising societies tend to take for granted that the foreskin is a natural body part that it would make no sense to remove without a specific medical indication, and most societies where circumcision is a cultural or religious practice treat it explicitly as such, North American society finds itself in a strange middle ground. While Allan argues persuasively that North American circumcision is fundamentally a cultural practice, it is treated as a medical one, both by the medical community and by society at large. This creates an odd situation in which public discourse about foreskins treats them as worthless (so as to avoid upsetting the majority of men with circumcised penises) while not explicitly identifying their removal as a cultural or religious necessity unless one happens to be Jewish or perhaps Muslim. Instead, we have a society where the foreskin and its removal are clearly culturally significant, but this significance is generally not openly acknowledged.
The later chapters, on intactivism and foreskin restoration are disappointingly short, but this is likely unavoidable, given how little research there has been on these topics, and these sections still have some interest, especially as he tries to provide balanced coverage, noting that intactivists have legitimate points while also discussing the ways in which the present-day intactivist movement is disturbingly intertwined with antisemitic and "men's rights activist" ideas.
Read
July 10, 2024Thank you to Net Galley for sending me an ARC of this book in exchange for an honest review.
I requested this book because it the cover and title made it seem more humorous and accessible than it actually is. This book is pretty much a textbook on the foreskin in Anglo-American culture. It's interesting because the author frequently talks about discussion of the foreskin and circumcisions are largely intertwined, and how most cannot discuss the foreskin without discussing circumcision. Still, the book's very title references circumcision.
I thought this was going to be a fun, sexual health, that can be accessible for most audiences. It's not, it's a very academic book (although the author's writing is less dense than some academic texts, I will give them that). I just was not interested in that, and I feel it should be advertised as such.
I requested this book because it the cover and title made it seem more humorous and accessible than it actually is. This book is pretty much a textbook on the foreskin in Anglo-American culture. It's interesting because the author frequently talks about discussion of the foreskin and circumcisions are largely intertwined, and how most cannot discuss the foreskin without discussing circumcision. Still, the book's very title references circumcision.
I thought this was going to be a fun, sexual health, that can be accessible for most audiences. It's not, it's a very academic book (although the author's writing is less dense than some academic texts, I will give them that). I just was not interested in that, and I feel it should be advertised as such.
July 29, 2024
This definitely seemed like it would be a more approachable book around men's studies on the topic of foreskin, however, it was surprisingly in depth and formal, which was very educational. Allan discusses cultural and medical reasons why people tend to get circumcised and also disproves any "superstitions." If you are interested in men's studies, men's health, or just curious about the historic relevance of circumcision, this book is for you. Thank you Netgalley and Jonathan Allan for this ARC!
October 29, 2024
This book was a riveting exploration of something I never really took the time to think a whole lot about. I found the historical lessons elucidating and erudite, but the book still feels approachable and entertaining for a reader who doesn't have a background in history or biology. I look forward to buying a physical copy of this book as soon as possible.
Thank you to Jonathan A Allan, University of Regina Press, and Netgalley for the ARC in exchange for my honest review.
Thank you to Jonathan A Allan, University of Regina Press, and Netgalley for the ARC in exchange for my honest review.
May 12, 2025
Interesting and thoughtful but ultimately too academic/dense/repetitive for general reading
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews