Igor van den Hoven wrote:

See Briar's response, part of it is social conditioning: uncut =
unclean, and another part is denial.

While it's true that an uncircumcised penis isn't always unclean, the fact
remains that a) it will become unclean faster than the circumcised model,
and b) cleaning it is more involved.

The foreskin, of course, is broadly speaking a fold of skin, under which is
a warm, moist environment. The fold traps dead cells, urine, sweat, and -
significantly - bacteria. Of course, the warm, moist environment is the
perfect breeding ground for bacteria, and so they multiply, contributing to
the foul smell of smegma as they do.

Some have argued in the past that smegma is a natural product of the body,
and so cannot be unclean. I simply ask those people why they bother washing
at all.

Having none of these characteristics, the circumcised penis behaves more
like the surface of, say, your arm. Sure, cells are shed and sweat is
produced and so on, but these quickly dry and are brushed off. Naturally,
you still want to wash there, but it's less urgent.

Briar feels the same thing, but
he represses his feelings of being incomplete and keeps screaming
inside that he is normal.

Well, especially if he lives in the United States, he is normal, since the
word means "conforming to social norms". But perhaps that wasn't what you
meant.

More likely is that he simply enjoys being circumcised and is thankful for
it. I completely understand and share this viewpoint, for it is a great
improvement on the original.