22,310
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
typo (task force)
In the [[AAP]]'s 2012 Circumcision Task force report, the issues of sensitivity reduction were given obligatory mention but largely glossed over, and little space was devoted to the topic. The purpose of the now expired AAP 2012 report was to encourage neonatal non-therapeutic circumcision and [[third-party payment]] so little or nothing was said about the multiple functions of the [[foreskin]].
At right is an easy-to-understand illustration of the Sorrells study showing the loss of tissues. Tissues show in color their relative sensitivity thresholds to light touch. sensitive tissue. On the infographic's opposite side: The AAP's expressed skepticism (quotes from their 2012 Circumcision Taskforce task force report) on whether loss of all that erogenous tissue could really affect sexual enjoyment.
Arguably, claiming there's no evidence that circumcision diminishes sexual enjoyment is essentially implying the obverse: that it's perfectly safe and reasonable to assume that the human foreskin, despite evolving over millions of years, has no anatomical significance in sexual mechanics, and has zero relevance to sexual pleasure and satisfaction. That statement sounds immediately absurd, however.