Difference between revisions of "Psychological literature about male circumcision"

From IntactiWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Articles: Add URL.)
(Add article.)
Line 111: Line 111:
 
}}
 
}}
 
* {{REFjournal
 
* {{REFjournal
  |last= Nunberg
+
  |last=Nunberg
 
  |init=H
 
  |init=H
 
  |author-link=Herman Nunberg
 
  |author-link=Herman Nunberg
Line 394: Line 394:
 
}}
 
}}
 
* {{VanderKolkBA 1989}}
 
* {{VanderKolkBA 1989}}
 
+
* {{REFjournal
 
+
|last=Prescott
 
+
|init=JW
 
+
|author-link=
 
+
|url=https://www.cirp.org/library/psych/prescott2/
 +
|title=Genital pain vs. genital pleasure: why the one and not the other?
 +
|journal=The Truthseeker
 +
|date=1989-07
 +
|volume=1
 +
|issue=3
 +
|pages=14-21
 +
|quote=It is this developmental neuropsychologist's conviction that these early experiences of genital pain contribute to the encoding of the brain for sado-masochistic behaviors.
 +
|accessdate=2024-06-23
 +
}}
 
* {{REFjournal
 
* {{REFjournal
 
  |last=Chamberlain
 
  |last=Chamberlain

Revision as of 16:31, 23 June 2024

Construction Site

This article is work in progress and not yet part of the free encyclopedia IntactiWiki.

 

This page collects and indexes psychological literature about male circumcision.

Work in progress: The following information does not claim to be complete. More content will be added gradually.

Introduction

The circumcision industry would like parents and the public to believe that circumcision is psychologically benign and has no effect on the patient, therefore the information provided to satisfy the requirements of informed consent typically excludes any discussion of the psychological trauma, injury, and emotional effects of circumcision.[1]

Some of the literature cited here will include certain articles of a psychological nature that appeared in medical journals.

Articles


References

  1. REFjournal Tye MC, Sardi LM. Psychological, psychosocial, and psychosexual aspects of penile circumcision. Int J Impot Res. May 2023; 35(3): 242-8. PMID. DOI. Retrieved 22 June 2024.
    Quote: Policy statements on penile circumcision have focused primarily on disease, dysfunction, or sensation, with relatively little consideration of psychological and psychosocial implications of the procedure. There has also been minimal consideration of potential qualitative changes in the subjective experience of sexual activity following changes in penile anatomy (foreskin removal) or associated sexual biomechanics.