Well we are all hear because we want to emulate the shape and feel of the circumcised penis but without the surgery (well I am)
“The History of Circumcision” by P.C, Remondino offers this great description of the circumcised glans:
“...the unconstricted glans penis assumes the shape and appearance that is seen in the circumcised. The head is shorter, the face flat and abrupt, and the meautus, instead of being at the end of a conical point, is situated on the smooth, rounded front of the glans, and does not differ in colour from the covering of the glans itself [...] The corona is prominent and well developed”
This puts into words the change in my glans shape and size since I started pulling back (although this process started when my frenulum was torn back in 1992). My meatus (pee hole) now sits on the front, not underneath, and my corona has sprung upwards, creating a crease acros the middle of my glans face and my head is shorter as a consequence. It is also thicker, and I am developing the prominent coronal ridge that many cut guys have, even when flaccid, although this is taking time.
Also, of direct relevance to us who pull bacK:
“It is a well-known fact that the most forlorn and mouse-headed, long-nosed glans penis will, within a week or two after its liberation from its fetters of preputial bands, assume its true shape”
So basically, once the frenulum is cut or torn then the transition to a cut look is rapid.
The author goes on to make the argument that the exposed glans is the true shape (certainly looks better!) although I guess that will not be accepted by many.
Here is a link to the book on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/search?index=books&linkCode=qs&keywords=9780898754100Quotes used in an academic context and go buy the book1