IntactiWiki

Sexual injury of circumcision: Difference between revisions

← Older editNewer edit →
WikiAdmin (talk | contribs)
administrator, administrators, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators
22,827 edits
WikiAdmin (talk | contribs)
administrator, administrators, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators
22,827 edits
m adjusted REFjournal
Line 3: Line 3:
The prepuce is primary, erogenous tissue necessary for normal sexual  function.<ref name="cold-taylor1999">{{REFjournal
The prepuce is primary, erogenous tissue necessary for normal sexual  function.<ref name="cold-taylor1999">{{REFjournal
  |last=Cold
  |last=Cold
  |first=C.J.
  |init=CJ
  |author-link=
  |author-link=
  |last2=Taylor
  |last2=Taylor
  |first2=J.R.
  |init2=JR
  |author2-link=John R. Taylor
  |author2-link=John R. Taylor
  |title=The prepuce
  |title=The prepuce
Line 84: Line 84:
  |last=Sorrells
  |last=Sorrells
  |first=Morris L.
  |first=Morris L.
|init=ML
  |author-link=Morris L. Sorrells
  |author-link=Morris L. Sorrells
|last2=Snyder
  |first2=James L.
  |first2=James L.
  |last2=Snyder
  |init2=JL
|last3=Reiss
  |first3=Mark D.
  |first3=Mark D.
  |last3=Reiss
  |init3=MD
|last4=Eden
  |first4=Christopher
  |first4=Christopher
  |last4=Eden
  |init4=C
|last5=Milos
  |first5=Marilyn F.
  |first5=Marilyn F.
  |last5=Milos
  |init5=MF
  |author5-link=Marilyn Fayre Milos
  |author5-link=Marilyn Fayre Milos
|last6=Wilcox
  |first6=Norma
  |first6=Norma
  |last6=Wilcox
  |init6=N
|last7=Van Howe
  |first7=Robert S.
  |first7=Robert S.
  |last8=Van Howe
  |init7=RS
  |author8-link=Robert Van Howe
  |author7-link=Robert Van Howe
  |title=Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis
  |title=Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis
  |journal=BJU Int
  |journal=BJU Int
Line 119: Line 126:
There were, however, some other little noticed papers overlooked by Masters & Johnson, that told a different story. Winklemann (1956) investigated the innervation of the prepuce and found it to be highly innervated.<ref name="winkleman1956">{{REFjournal
There were, however, some other little noticed papers overlooked by Masters & Johnson, that told a different story. Winklemann (1956) investigated the innervation of the prepuce and found it to be highly innervated.<ref name="winkleman1956">{{REFjournal
  |last=Winkelmann
  |last=Winkelmann
  |first=R.K.
  |init=RK
  |title=The cutaneous innervation of human newborn prepuce
  |title=The cutaneous innervation of human newborn prepuce
  |journal=Journal of Investigative Dermatology
  |journal=Journal of Investigative Dermatology
Line 134: Line 141:
}}</ref> Winkleman (1959) later identified the prepuce as "specific erogenous tissue".<ref name="winkleman1959">{{REFjournal
}}</ref> Winkleman (1959) later identified the prepuce as "specific erogenous tissue".<ref name="winkleman1959">{{REFjournal
  |last=Winkelmann
  |last=Winkelmann
  |first=R.K.
  |init=RK
  |title=The erogenous zones: their nerve supply and significance
  |title=The erogenous zones: their nerve supply and significance
  |journal=Proceedings of the Staff Meetings of the Mayo Clinic
  |journal=Proceedings of the Staff Meetings of the Mayo Clinic
Line 153: Line 160:
  Now let us consider whether the operation is in any way harmful or contraindicated. The function of the prepuce is to protect the glans, the latter being almost insensitive to most ordinary tactile and thermal stimuli. It has, however, specific receptors for other pleasurable sensations. Removal of the prepuce exposes the glans to foreign stimuli which dull these special receptors. During the act of coitus the uncircumcised phallus penetrates smoothly and without friction, the prepuce gradually retracting as the organ advances. In contrast, when the circumcised organ is introduced during coitus, friction develops between the glans and vaginal mucosa. Penetration in the circumcised man has been compared to thrusting the foot into a sock held open at the top, while, on the other hand, in the intact counterpart it has been likened to slipping the foot into a sock that has been previously rolled up.<ref name="morgan1965">{{REFjournal
  Now let us consider whether the operation is in any way harmful or contraindicated. The function of the prepuce is to protect the glans, the latter being almost insensitive to most ordinary tactile and thermal stimuli. It has, however, specific receptors for other pleasurable sensations. Removal of the prepuce exposes the glans to foreign stimuli which dull these special receptors. During the act of coitus the uncircumcised phallus penetrates smoothly and without friction, the prepuce gradually retracting as the organ advances. In contrast, when the circumcised organ is introduced during coitus, friction develops between the glans and vaginal mucosa. Penetration in the circumcised man has been compared to thrusting the foot into a sock held open at the top, while, on the other hand, in the intact counterpart it has been likened to slipping the foot into a sock that has been previously rolled up.<ref name="morgan1965">{{REFjournal
  |last=Morgan
  |last=Morgan
  |first=W.K.C.
  |init=WKC
  |author-link=
  |author-link=
  |title=The rape of the phallus
  |title=The rape of the phallus
Line 175: Line 182:
  |last=Morgan
  |last=Morgan
  |first=William Keith C.
  |first=William Keith C.
|init=WKC
  |author-link=
  |author-link=
  |etal=No
  |etal=No
  |title=http://www.cirp.org/library/general/morgan2/
  |title=Penile Plunder
  |trans-title=
  |trans-title=
  |language=
  |language=
Line 199: Line 207:
The sensory pleasure induced by tactile stimulation of the foreskin is almost totally lost after its surgical removal. The surface of the exposed glans, as we know, has no capacity to receive and transmit any fine sensations of touch, heat, etc. Consequently, the fundamental biological sexual act becomes, for the circumcised male, simply a satisfaction of an urge and not the refined sensory experience that it was meant to be.<ref name= "falliers1970">{{REFjournal
The sensory pleasure induced by tactile stimulation of the foreskin is almost totally lost after its surgical removal. The surface of the exposed glans, as we know, has no capacity to receive and transmit any fine sensations of touch, heat, etc. Consequently, the fundamental biological sexual act becomes, for the circumcised male, simply a satisfaction of an urge and not the refined sensory experience that it was meant to be.<ref name= "falliers1970">{{REFjournal
  |last=Falliers
  |last=Falliers
  |first=CJ
  |INIT=CJ
  |author-link=
  |author-link=
  |etal=no
  |etal=no
  |title= Circumcision (letter)
  |title=Circumcision (letter)
|trans-title=
|language=
  |journal=JAMA
  |journal=JAMA
  |location=
  |location=
Line 252: Line 258:
Results of studies of the effect on penile sensitivity have been mixed. In a British study of 150 men circumcised as adults for penile problems, Masood ''et al.'' (2005) found that 38% reported improved penile sensation (p=0.01), 18% reported worse penile sensation, while the remainder (44%) reported no change.<ref name= "masood2005">{{REFjournal
Results of studies of the effect on penile sensitivity have been mixed. In a British study of 150 men circumcised as adults for penile problems, Masood ''et al.'' (2005) found that 38% reported improved penile sensation (p=0.01), 18% reported worse penile sensation, while the remainder (44%) reported no change.<ref name= "masood2005">{{REFjournal
  |last=Masood
  |last=Masood
  |first=S.
  |init=S
  |last2=Patel
  |last2=Patel
  |first2=H.R.
  |init2=HR
  |last3=Himpson
  |last3=Himpson
  |first3=R.C.
  |init3=RC
  |last4=Palmer
  |last4=Palmer
  |first4=J.H.
  |init4=JH
  |last5=Mufti
  |last5=Mufti
  |first5=G.R.
  |init5=GR
  |last6=Sheriff
  |last6=Sheriff
  |first6=M.K.
  |init6=M.K
  |title=Penile sensitivity and sexual satisfaction after circumcision: are we informing men correctly?
  |title=Penile sensitivity and sexual satisfaction after circumcision: are we informing men correctly?
  |journal=Urol Internationalalis
  |journal=Urol Internationalalis
Line 277: Line 283:
}}</ref>  In a survey of men circumcised as adults for medical (93%) or elective (7%) reasons, Fink ''et al.'' (2002) found an association between adult circumcision and decreased penile sensitivity that "bordered on statistical significance" (p=0.08).<ref name="fink2002">{{REFjournal
}}</ref>  In a survey of men circumcised as adults for medical (93%) or elective (7%) reasons, Fink ''et al.'' (2002) found an association between adult circumcision and decreased penile sensitivity that "bordered on statistical significance" (p=0.08).<ref name="fink2002">{{REFjournal
  |last=Fink
  |last=Fink
  |first=K.S.
  |init=KS
|first2=C.C.
  |last2=Carson
  |last2=Carson
  |first3=R.F.
  |init2=CC
  |last3=DeVillis
  |last3=DeVillis
|init3=RF
  |title=Adult circumcision outcomes study: effect on erectile function, penile sensitivity, sexual activity and satisfaction
  |title=Adult circumcision outcomes study: effect on erectile function, penile sensitivity, sexual activity and satisfaction
  |journal=J Urol
  |journal=J Urol
Line 302: Line 308:
Yang ''et al.'' (1998) concluded in their study into the innervation of the penile shaft and glans penis that: "The distinct pattern of innervation of the glans emphasizes the role of the glans as a sensory structure."<ref name="yang1998">{{REFjournal
Yang ''et al.'' (1998) concluded in their study into the innervation of the penile shaft and glans penis that: "The distinct pattern of innervation of the glans emphasizes the role of the glans as a sensory structure."<ref name="yang1998">{{REFjournal
  |last=Yang
  |last=Yang
  |first=C.C.
  |init=CC
  |last2=Bradley
  |last2=Bradley
  |first2=W.E.
  |init2=WE
  |title=Neuroanatomy of the penile portion of the human dorsal nerve of the penis
  |title=Neuroanatomy of the penile portion of the human dorsal nerve of the penis
  |journal=British Journal Urology
  |journal=British Journal Urology
Line 322: Line 328:
  |last=Szabo
  |last=Szabo
  |first=Robert
  |first=Robert
|init=R
|last2=Short
  |first2=Roger V.
  |first2=Roger V.
  |last2=Short
  |init2=RV
  |title=How does male circumcision protect against HIV infection?
  |title=How does male circumcision protect against HIV infection?
  |journal=BMJ
  |journal=BMJ
Line 344: Line 352:
Some recent researchers assert that the [[foreskin]] is sexually sensitive highly-innervated erogenous tissue.<ref name="winkleman1956" /><ref name="winkleman1959" /> <ref name="taylor1996">{{REFjournal
Some recent researchers assert that the [[foreskin]] is sexually sensitive highly-innervated erogenous tissue.<ref name="winkleman1956" /><ref name="winkleman1959" /> <ref name="taylor1996">{{REFjournal
  |last=Taylor
  |last=Taylor
  |first=J.R.
  |init=JR
  |author-link=John R. Taylor
  |author-link=John R. Taylor
|first2=A.P.
  |last2=Lockwood
  |last2=Lockwood
  |first3=A.J.
  |init2=AP
  |last3=Taylor
  |last3=Taylor
|init3=AJ
  |title=The prepuce: Specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision
  |title=The prepuce: Specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision
  |journal=British journal of urology
  |journal=British journal of urology
Line 366: Line 374:
Circumcision removes the [[Ridged band|ridged band]] at the end of the foreskin.<ref name="taylor1996" /> Taylor (1996) observed that the ridged band had more [[Meissner's corpuscles]] — a kind of nerve ending that is concentrated in areas of greatest sensitivity  — than the areas of the foreskin with smooth mucus membranes and a rich blood supply to serve the neurological tissue.  Taylor (2000) postulated that the ridged band is sexually sensitive and plays a role in normal sexual function. He also suggested that the [[gliding action]], possible only when there was enough loose skin on the shaft of the penis, serves to stimulate the ridged band through contact with the corona of the [[glans penis]] during vaginal intercourse.<ref name="taylor2000">{{REFjournal
Circumcision removes the [[Ridged band|ridged band]] at the end of the foreskin.<ref name="taylor1996" /> Taylor (1996) observed that the ridged band had more [[Meissner's corpuscles]] — a kind of nerve ending that is concentrated in areas of greatest sensitivity  — than the areas of the foreskin with smooth mucus membranes and a rich blood supply to serve the neurological tissue.  Taylor (2000) postulated that the ridged band is sexually sensitive and plays a role in normal sexual function. He also suggested that the [[gliding action]], possible only when there was enough loose skin on the shaft of the penis, serves to stimulate the ridged band through contact with the corona of the [[glans penis]] during vaginal intercourse.<ref name="taylor2000">{{REFjournal
  |last=Taylor
  |last=Taylor
  |first=J.R.
  |init=JR
  |author-link=John R. Taylor
  |author-link=John R. Taylor
  |title=Back and forth (letter)
  |title=Back and forth (letter)
Line 382: Line 390:
}}</ref> This gliding action was also described by Lakshmanan (1980).<ref name="lakshaman1980">{{REFjournal
}}</ref> This gliding action was also described by Lakshmanan (1980).<ref name="lakshaman1980">{{REFjournal
  |last=Lakshmanan
  |last=Lakshmanan
  |first=S.
  |init=S
|first2=S.
  |last2=Parkash
  |last2=Parkash
|init2=S
  |title=Human prepuce: some aspects of structure and function
  |title=Human prepuce: some aspects of structure and function
  |journal=Indian journal of surgery
  |journal=Indian journal of surgery
Line 402: Line 410:
  |last=Boyle
  |last=Boyle
  |first=Gregory J.
  |first=Gregory J.
|init=GJ
|last2=Bensley
  |first2=Gillian A.
  |first2=Gillian A.
  |last2=Bensley
  |init2=GA
  |title=Adverse Sexual and Psychological Effects of Male Infant Circumcision
  |title=Adverse Sexual and Psychological Effects of Male Infant Circumcision
  |journal=Psychological reports
  |journal=Psychological reports
Line 422: Line 432:
In 2009, Schober ''et al'' reported on self-assessed sexual sensitivity in 81 men, 11 of whom were uncircumcised. When assessing areas producing sexual pleasure, the foreskin was ranked 7th, after the glans, lower and upper shaft, and the left and right sides of the penis, but above the area between scrotum and anus, the scrotum itself, and the anus.<ref name= "schober2008">{{REFjournal
In 2009, Schober ''et al'' reported on self-assessed sexual sensitivity in 81 men, 11 of whom were uncircumcised. When assessing areas producing sexual pleasure, the foreskin was ranked 7th, after the glans, lower and upper shaft, and the left and right sides of the penis, but above the area between scrotum and anus, the scrotum itself, and the anus.<ref name= "schober2008">{{REFjournal
  |last=Schober
  |last=Schober
  |first=J.M.
  |init=JM
  |last2=Meyer-Bahlburg
  |last2=Meyer-Bahlburg
  |first2=H.F.
  |init2=HF
  |last3=Dolezal
  |last3=Dolezal
  |first3=C.
  |init3=C
  |title=Self-ratings of genital anatomy, sexual sensitivity and function in men using the 'Self-Assessment of Genital Anatomy and Sexual Function, Male' questionnaire
  |title=Self-ratings of genital anatomy, sexual sensitivity and function in men using the 'Self-Assessment of Genital Anatomy and Sexual Function, Male' questionnaire
  |journal=BJU Int
  |journal=BJU Int
Line 445: Line 455:
Reports detailing the effect of circumcision on [[erectile dysfunction]] have been mixed.  Studies have variously found a statistically significant increase,<ref name=fink2002/><ref name= "shen2004">{{REFjournal
Reports detailing the effect of circumcision on [[erectile dysfunction]] have been mixed.  Studies have variously found a statistically significant increase,<ref name=fink2002/><ref name= "shen2004">{{REFjournal
  |last=Shen
  |last=Shen
  |first=Z.
  |init=Z
  |last2=Chen
  |last2=Chen
  |first2=S.
  |init2=S
  |last3=Zhu
  |last3=Zhu
  |first3=C.
  |init3=C
  |last4=Wan
  |last4=Wan
  |first4=Q.
  |init4=Q
  |last5=Chen
  |last5=Chen
  |first5=Z.
  |init5=Z
  |title=Erectile function evaluation after adult circumcision
  |title=Erectile function evaluation after adult circumcision
  |journal=Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue
  |journal=Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue
Line 468: Line 478:
}}</ref>  or decrease,<ref name= "richters2006">{{REFjournal
}}</ref>  or decrease,<ref name= "richters2006">{{REFjournal
  |last=Richters
  |last=Richters
  |first=J.
  |init=J
  |last2=Patel
  |last2=Patel
  |first2=H.R.
  |init2=HR
  |last3=Himpson
  |last3=Himpson
  |first3=R.C.
  |init3=RC
  |last4=Palmer
  |last4=Palmer
  |first4=J.H.
  |init4=JH
  |last5=Mufti
  |last5=Mufti
  |first5=G.R.
  |init5=GR
  |last6=Sheriff
  |last6=Sheriff
  |first6=M.K.
  |init6=MK
  |title=Circumcision in Australia: prevalence and effects on sexual health
  |title=Circumcision in Australia: prevalence and effects on sexual health
  |journal=International Journal of Sexually Transmissible Diseases and AIDS
  |journal=International Journal of Sexually Transmissible Diseases and AIDS
Line 493: Line 503:
}}</ref> <ref name="Laumann1997"/> in erectile dysfunction among circumcised men, while other studies have shown little to no effect.<ref name="masood2005"/<ref name="senkul2004"/><ref name="Collins2002">{{REFjournal
}}</ref> <ref name="Laumann1997"/> in erectile dysfunction among circumcised men, while other studies have shown little to no effect.<ref name="masood2005"/<ref name="senkul2004"/><ref name="Collins2002">{{REFjournal
  |last=Collins
  |last=Collins
  |first=S.
  |init=S
  |last2=Upshaw
  |last2=Upshaw
  |first2=J.
  |init2=J
  |last3=Rutchik
  |last3=Rutchik
  |first3=S.
  |init3=S
  |last4=Ohannessian
  |last4=Ohannessian
  |first4=C.
  |init4=C
  |last5=Ortenberg
  |last5=Ortenberg
  |first5=J.
  |init5=J
  |last6=Albertsen
  |last6=Albertsen
  |first6=P.
  |init6=P
  |title=Effects of circumcision on male sexual function: debunking a myth?
  |title=Effects of circumcision on male sexual function: debunking a myth?
  |journal=Journal of Urology
  |journal=Journal of Urology
Line 523: Line 533:
  |last=DaiSik
  |last=DaiSik
  |first=Kim
  |first=Kim
|init=K
|last2=Pang
  |first2=Myung-Geol
  |first2=Myung-Geol
  |last2=Pang
  |init2=MG
  |title=The effect of male circumcision on sexuality
  |title=The effect of male circumcision on sexuality
  |journal=BJU Int
  |journal=BJU Int
Line 545: Line 557:
Waldinger ''et al.'' recruited 500 men (98 circumcised and 261 not-circumcised) from five countries: the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Spain, Turkey, and the United States and studied their ejaculation times during [[sexual intercourse]].  They found that the circumcised men in the study took on average 6.7 minutes to ejaculate, compared with 6.0 minutes for the uncircumcised men.  This difference was not statistically significant. The comparison excluded Turkey, which was significantly different from the other countries studied.<ref name="Waldinger2005">{{REFjournal
Waldinger ''et al.'' recruited 500 men (98 circumcised and 261 not-circumcised) from five countries: the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Spain, Turkey, and the United States and studied their ejaculation times during [[sexual intercourse]].  They found that the circumcised men in the study took on average 6.7 minutes to ejaculate, compared with 6.0 minutes for the uncircumcised men.  This difference was not statistically significant. The comparison excluded Turkey, which was significantly different from the other countries studied.<ref name="Waldinger2005">{{REFjournal
  |last=Waldinger
  |last=Waldinger
  |first=M.D.
  |init=MD
  |last2=Quinn
  |last2=Quinn
  |first2=P.
  |init2=P
  |last3=Dilleen
  |last3=Dilleen
  |first3=M.
  |init3=M
  |last4=Mundayat
  |last4=Mundayat
  |first4=R.
  |init4=R
  |last5=Schweitzer
  |last5=Schweitzer
  |first5=D.H.
  |init5=DH
  |last6=Boolell
  |last6=Boolell
  |first6=M.
  |init6=M
  |title=Circumcision in the United States: prevalence, prophylactic effects, and sexual practice
  |title=Circumcision in the United States: prevalence, prophylactic effects, and sexual practice
  |journal=Journal of Sexual Medicine
  |journal=Journal of Sexual Medicine
Line 574: Line 586:
In a study of 42 Turkish men circumcised for religious reasons, Senkul ''et al.'' (2004) did not find a statistically significant difference in BMSFI ejaculation scores, but found a significant increase in the mean time to ejaculate. The authors suggested that delayed ejaculation may be seen as a benefit.<ref name="senkul2004">{{REFjournal
In a study of 42 Turkish men circumcised for religious reasons, Senkul ''et al.'' (2004) did not find a statistically significant difference in BMSFI ejaculation scores, but found a significant increase in the mean time to ejaculate. The authors suggested that delayed ejaculation may be seen as a benefit.<ref name="senkul2004">{{REFjournal
  |last=Senkul
  |last=Senkul
  |first=T.
  |init=T
|first2=C.
  |last2=Iseri
  |last2=Iseri
  |first3=B.
  |init2=C
  |last3=Sen
  |last3=Sen
  |first4=K.
  |init3=B
  |last4=Karademir
  |last4=Karademir
  |first5=F.
  |init4=K
  |last5=Saracoglu
  |last5=Saracoglu
  |first6=D.
  |init5=F
  |last6=Erden
  |last6=Erden
|init6=D
  |title=Circumcision in Adults: Effect on Sexual Function
  |title=Circumcision in Adults: Effect on Sexual Function
  |journal=Urology
  |journal=Urology
Line 613: Line 625:
Laumann ''et al.'' reported that circumcised men in their survey displayed a greater rates of experience of various sexual practices, including oral sex, anal sex, and [[masturbation]].<ref name="Laumann1997">{{REFjournal
Laumann ''et al.'' reported that circumcised men in their survey displayed a greater rates of experience of various sexual practices, including oral sex, anal sex, and [[masturbation]].<ref name="Laumann1997">{{REFjournal
  |last=Laumann
  |last=Laumann
  |first=E.O.
  |init=EO
|first2=C.M.
  |last2=Masi
  |last2=Masi
  |first3=E.W.
  |init2=CM
  |last3=Zuckerman
  |last3=Zuckerman
|init3=EW
  |title=Circumcision in the United States: prevalence, prophylactic effects, and sexual practice
  |title=Circumcision in the United States: prevalence, prophylactic effects, and sexual practice
  |journal=[[Journal of the American Medical Association|JAMA]]
  |journal=[[Journal of the American Medical Association|JAMA]]
Line 658: Line 670:
Wildman & Wildman (1976) surveyed 55 young women in Georgia, US, reporting that 47 (89%) of respondents preferred the circumcised penis (the remainder preferred the uncircumcised penis).<ref>{{REFjournal
Wildman & Wildman (1976) surveyed 55 young women in Georgia, US, reporting that 47 (89%) of respondents preferred the circumcised penis (the remainder preferred the uncircumcised penis).<ref>{{REFjournal
  |last=Wildman
  |last=Wildman
  |first=R.W.
  |init=RW
  |last2=Wildman
  |last2=Wildman
  |first2=R.W.
  |init2=RW 2nd
  |last3=Brown
  |last3=Brown
  |first3=A.
  |init3=A
  |last4=Trice
  |last4=Trice
  |first4=C.
  |init4=C
  |title=Note on males' and females' preferences for opposite-sex body parts, bust sizes, and bust-revealing clothing
  |title=Note on males' and females' preferences for opposite-sex body parts, bust sizes, and bust-revealing clothing
  |journal=Psychological Reports
  |journal=Psychological Reports
Line 670: Line 682:
  |issue=2
  |issue=2
  |pages=485-486
  |pages=485-486
  |url=http://circs.org/library/wildman/index.html
  |url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1265180/
  |quote=
  |quote=
  |pubmedID=1265180
  |pubmedID=1265180
Line 683: Line 695:
O'Hara and O'Hara (1999) argue that foreskin is a natural gliding stimulator of the vaginal walls during intercourse, increasing a woman's overall clitoral stimulation and helping her achieve orgasm more quickly and more often. Without the foreskin's gliding action, they suggest, it can be more difficult for a woman to achieve orgasm during intercourse.<ref name= "OHara1999">{{REFjournal
O'Hara and O'Hara (1999) argue that foreskin is a natural gliding stimulator of the vaginal walls during intercourse, increasing a woman's overall clitoral stimulation and helping her achieve orgasm more quickly and more often. Without the foreskin's gliding action, they suggest, it can be more difficult for a woman to achieve orgasm during intercourse.<ref name= "OHara1999">{{REFjournal
  |last=O'Hara
  |last=O'Hara
  |first=K.
  |init=K
|first2=J.
  |last2=O'Hara
  |last2=O'Hara
|init2=J
  |title=The effect of male circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female partner
  |title=The effect of male circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female partner
  |journal=BJU International
  |journal=BJU International
Line 705: Line 717:
  |last=Bensley
  |last=Bensley
  |first=Gillian A.
  |first=Gillian A.
|init=GA
|last2=Boyle
  |first2=Gregory J.
  |first2=Gregory J.
  |last2=Boyle
  |init2=GJ
|author2-link=Gregory J. Boyle
  |title=Effects of male circumcision on female arousal and orgasm
  |title=Effects of male circumcision on female arousal and orgasm
  |journal=New Zealand medical journal
  |journal=New Zealand medical journal
Line 725: Line 740:
As previously reported, the foreskin reduces the force required for penetration of the female partner's vagina by as much as ninety percent,<ref name="taves2002">{{REFjournal
As previously reported, the foreskin reduces the force required for penetration of the female partner's vagina by as much as ninety percent,<ref name="taves2002">{{REFjournal
  |last=Taves
  |last=Taves
  |first=D.
  |init=D
  |author-link=
  |author-link=
  |title=The intromission function of the foreskin
  |title=The intromission function of the foreskin
Line 742: Line 757:
  |last=Warren
  |last=Warren
  |first=John
  |first=John
|init=J
  |author-link=John Warren
  |author-link=John Warren
  |last2=Bigelow
  |last2=Bigelow
  |first2=Jim
  |first2=Jim
|init2=J
  |author2-link=Jim Bigelow
  |author2-link=Jim Bigelow
  |title=The case against circumcision
  |title=The case against circumcision
Line 763: Line 780:
<blockquote>Clearly, the anatomically complete penis offers a more rewarding experience for the female partner during coitus. While this study has some obvious methodological flaws, all the differences cannot be attributed to them. It is important that these findings be confirmed by a prospective study of a randomly selected population of women with experience with both types of men. It would be useful to examine the role of the foreskin in other sexual activities. Because these findings are of interest, the negative effect of circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female partner needs to be part of any discussions providing 'informed consent' before circumcision.<ref name="ohara1998">{{REFjournal
<blockquote>Clearly, the anatomically complete penis offers a more rewarding experience for the female partner during coitus. While this study has some obvious methodological flaws, all the differences cannot be attributed to them. It is important that these findings be confirmed by a prospective study of a randomly selected population of women with experience with both types of men. It would be useful to examine the role of the foreskin in other sexual activities. Because these findings are of interest, the negative effect of circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female partner needs to be part of any discussions providing 'informed consent' before circumcision.<ref name="ohara1998">{{REFjournal
  |last=O'Hara
  |last=O'Hara
  |first=K
  |init=K
  |author-link=
  |author-link=
  |last2=O'Hara
  |last2=O'Hara
  |first2=J
  |init2=J
  |author2-link=
  |author2-link=
  |etal=no
  |etal=no
Line 815: Line 832:
  |last=Frisch
  |last=Frisch
  |first=Morten
  |first=Morten
|init=M
  |author-link=
  |author-link=
  |last2=Lindholm
  |last2=Lindholm
  |first2=Morten
  |first2=Morten
|init2=M
  |author2-link=
  |author2-link=
  |last3=Grønbæk
  |last3=Grønbæk
  |first3=Morten
  |first3=Morten
|init3=M
  |author3-link=
  |author3-link=
  |etal=no
  |etal=no
  |title=Male circumcision and sexual function in men and women: a survey-based, cross-sectional study in Denmark.
  |title=Male circumcision and sexual function in men and women: a survey-based, cross-sectional study in Denmark.
|trans-title=
|language=
  |journal=Int J Epidemiol.
  |journal=Int J Epidemiol.
  |location=
  |location=
Retrieved from "https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/Sexual_injury_of_circumcision"