This is what my female friends have described to me in regards to the difference in their experiences between the natural penis and the circumcised penis during sex; Foreskin on a penis makes it easier to masturbate a man, because the shaft skin moves up and down over the head with ease while they're pumping it. No friction means no lubricants are needed. A circumcised penis, has a shaft skin that is tighter when erect and its the girls hand that travels up and down the shaft not the shaft skin. The friction created by this method almost always requires some kind of lubrication to masturbate him for any length of time.
Most of my female friends agree that during intercourse, circumcised men thrust faster and harder to achieve their own orgasm. If the girl's not wet do to lack of proper foreplay, lubricants are needed to make intercourse easier and less painful. Men with foreskin tend to thrust slower, uses shorter strokes and rarely if ever require a lubricant for intercourse.
Most of my female friends preferred the foreskin intercourse as they tell me there's less pain and more pleasure from beginning to end.
They told me oral sex is enjoyable with either man. The only difference was the variables of pleasuring the man's foreskin and the way they performed oral on it. Some mentioned they thought the natural penised man seemed to enjoy sex more and orgasmed more strongly. The others didn't notice a huge difference. That said, all my female friends said natural or circumcised, if their partner had poor hygiene, oral was a turn off and that a shower or (in the event a shower was not available) wet wipes were a good and fast way to clean them up before oral sex.
As for what's better? That will always become dependent on the individual woman. Ultimately, its my belief that sex is 50% in the mind and 50% in the body. If you have the hots for the person I see little reason you won't enjoy the physical aspect.
When the penis is soft (at rest) the fore skin coverts the head of the penis. This means that the head of the penis is protected from rubbing on your pants or trouses, as a result the skin is softer and more senstive. Imagine how course you're lips are compared to the skin inside our mouth. That's the difference.
When the penis is erect the fore skin is pulled back revealing the head, the foreskin sits at the base and has movement, meaning when you wank or have sex, you hold the foreskin and move this over the penis. No need for lubrication.
A none circumsised penis is a lot more sensitive than a circumsised one.
The litmus test is if you put a sock over a guys dick and give him a wank, if he is enjoying it, the guy is circumsised, If he is bent double with pain, then he hasnt.
To answer your fair question with words alone is a challenge. I am uncut and will try to answer it.
That still photos leave you baffled does not surprise me. The problem is that cut and uncut look very very similar when both are hard. Also, when you cut the foreskin of a 1 day old child, it's hard to predict what the outcome will be for the man that baby boy will grow up to be. So circumcised men vary in appearance. The only complete answer is to spend some time carefully studying an example of each kind of penis. Even a video does not fully get across the complexity of an uncut johnson.
Before puberty, uncircumcised boys have long pointed foreskins and look pretty much alike. But what they look like when they are full grown will vary considerably, in particular how much of the head is covered when they are hard or relaxed. You see, puberty makes the penis grow more than its foreskin. This is one of many reasons why cutting a baby's foreskin is not a good idea.
There are cut men who look like uncut men with short foreskins. There are uncut men who spend their adult lives with the head always fully exposed, so that they look cut.
If you can find a ring scar on the erect penis, he's been cut for sure. But the ring scar is not always easy to see. If there is a lot of freedom in the penis skin when you do HJ, he's probably uncut. If there's a frenulum on the underside of the penis, he's most likely uncut.
Some years ago, I used to follow the blog of a woman who was a nude model and sex radical. One day she made a post on the top 5 unresolved sex questions in her mind, questions that she thought high school sex ed should address. And question #1 was, you guessed it, the difference between cut and uncut penis.
When I was a teen, nearly all boys around me did not know what circumcision meant and could not have answered the question "are you circumcised?" There GFs and sisters would have been even more clueless. Many women learn the difference from a college affair with a dude not born in the USA, or helping take care of an uncircumcised baby.
if you saw pictures you would definitly be able to tell the difference. uncircumcised just has more skin and if the guy has that skin they are a lot more sensative, pleasure wise, lots more nerve endings =]