22,335
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
reformatted date values
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1542/peds.103.3.686
|date=March 1999-03
|accessdate=
}}</ref> In January 2007, The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) stated "The effect of circumcision on penile sensation or sexual satisfaction is unknown. Because the epithelium of a circumcised glans becomes cornified, and because some feel nerve over-stimulation leads to desensitization, many believe that the glans of a circumcised penis is less sensitive. [...] No valid evidence to date, however, supports the notion that being circumcised affects sexual sensation or satisfaction."<ref name="AAFP"/> Conversely, a 2002 review by Boyle ''et al.'' stated that "the genitally intact male has thousands of fine touch receptors and other highly erogenous nerve endings—many of which are lost to circumcision, with an inevitable reduction in sexual sensation experienced by circumcised males." They concluded, "intercourse is less satisfying for both partners when the man is circumcised".<ref>{{REFweb
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65098-7
|date=May 2002-05
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00979.x
|date=August 2008-08
|accessdate=
}}</ref> In a 2009 study, Cortés-González ''et al.'' reported a statistically significant improvement in "perception of sexual events" (p=0.04).<ref name="cortes2009">{{REFjournal
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|date=November 2009-11
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06685.x
|date=March 2007-03
|accessdate=
}}</ref> In January 2007, The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) stated "The effect of circumcision on penile sensation or sexual satisfaction is unknown. Because the epithelium of a circumcised glans becomes cornified, and because some feel nerve over-stimulation leads to desensitization, many believe that the glans of a circumcised penis is less sensitive. Opinions differ about how this decreased sensitivity, which may result in prolonged time to orgasm, affects sexual satisfaction. An investigation of the exteroceptive and light tactile discrimination of the glans of circumcised and uncircumcised men found no difference on comparison. No valid evidence to date, however, supports the notion that being circumcised affects sexual sensation or satisfaction."
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1046/j.1464-410x.1998.00669.x
|date=July 1998-07
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|pubmedCID=1127372
|DOI=10.1136/bmj.320.7249.1592
|date=June 2000-06
|accessdate=2006-07-09
}}</ref> Bleustein ''et al.'' (2003) tested the sensitivity of the glans penis, and found no difference between circumcised and uncircumcised men.<ref name="bleustein2003">{{REFconference
| place=Chicago, Illinois | title=Effects of Circumcision on Male Penile Sensitivity | url=http://www.circs.org/library/bleustein/ | last=Bleustein | first=Clifford B. | coauthors=Haftan Eckholdt, Joseph C. Arezzo and Arnold Melman | source=American Urological Association 98th Annual Meeting | date=2003-04-26 |note=April 26-May 1, 2003 | accessdate=2019-09-29
}}</ref> Bleustein ''et al.'' (2005) divided 125 patients (62 uncircumcised men and 63 neonatally circumcised men) into groups based on their sexual dysfunction using the [[Sexological_testing#IIEF_.28International_Index_of_Erectile_Function.29|IIEF]](International Index of Erectile Function). Twenty-nine were placed in the functional group, and 96 in the dysfunctional group. Quantitative somatosensory testing (including vibration, pressure, spatial perception, and warm and cold thermal thresholds) was used on the dorsal midline glans of the penis. In the dysfunctional group, circumcised men (49 +/- 16 years) were significantly younger (P <0.01) than uncircumcised men (56 +/- 13 years). When controlling for age, hypertension, and diabetes, there was no difference in sensitivity.<ref name= "bleustein2005">{{REFjournal
|last=Bleustein
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1016/j.urology.2004.11.007
|date=April 2005-04
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.06970_6.x
|date=May 2007-05
|accessdate=
}}</ref> However, in a further letter to ''BJU International'', Young responded to Waskett and Morris, stating that Sorrells ''et al.'' found that one point, at least, on the glans of the circumcised penis was less sensitive than that of the intact penis.<ref name="young">{{REFjournal
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07072_1.x
|date=July 2007-07
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00471.x
|date=May 2007-05
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|date=January 1956-01
|accessdate=
}}</ref><ref>{{REFjournal
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|date=January 1959-01
|accessdate=
}}</ref><ref name="taylor">{{REFjournal
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1046/j.1464-410X.1996.85023.x
|date=February 1996-02
|accessdate=
}}</ref><ref name="taylorcold1999">{{REFjournal
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|date=February 1999-02
|accessdate=
}}</ref> Opponents of circumcision have cited these studies, which report on the sensitivity or innervation of the foreskin, claiming a sexual role based upon the presence of nerve-endings in the foreskin sensitive to light touch, stroking and fluttering sensations.
Circumcision removes the [[Ridged band|ridged band]] at the end of the foreskin.<ref name="taylor" /> Taylor (1996) observed that the ridged band had more [[Meissner's corpuscle]]s — a kind of nerve ending that is concentrated in areas of greatest sensitivity {{Citation needed|date=August 2007-08}} — than the areas of the foreskin with smooth mucus membranes. <!-- commented out until someone can explain how blood vessels relate to sensitivity: and a rich blood supply (intense vascularity)--> Taylor 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="taylor2">{{REFjournal
|last=Taylor
|first=J.R.
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|date=October 2000-10
|accessdate=
}}</ref> This gliding action was also described by Lakshmanan (1980).<ref>{{REFjournal
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.08166.x
|date=April 2009-09
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|date=July 2001-07
|accessdate=
}}</ref> They concluded, "Evidence has also started to accumulate that male circumcision may result in lifelong physical, sexual, and sometimes psychological harm as well."
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|date=January 2004-01
|accessdate=
}}</ref> or decrease,<ref name="cortes2009"/><ref name= "richters2006">{{REFjournal
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00979.x
|date=August 2008-08
|accessdate=
}}</ref><ref name="senkul2004"/><ref name="Collins2002">{{REFjournal
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07369.x
|date=January 2007-01
|accessdate=
}}</ref><ref name="kimpang2006"/>
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06646.x
|date=March 2007-03
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.0830s1079.x
|date=January 1999-01
|accessdate=
}}</ref> A study by psychologists Bensley & Boyle (2003) reported that vaginal dryness can be a problem when the male partner is circumcised.<ref>{{REFjournal
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|date=September 2003-09
|accessdate=
}}</ref> Boyle & Bensley (2001) reported that the lack of a foreskin in the male partner produces symptoms similar to those of female arousal disorder.{{Verify source|date=October 2008-10}} The authors hypothesized that the gliding action possibly involved intercourse with an uncircumcised partner might help prevent the loss of vaginal lubrication.{{Verify source|date=October 2008-10}} They stated that the respondents were self-selected, and that larger sample sizes are needed.<ref name="boyle2002" />
Cortés-González ''et al.'' studied 19 female partners of men scheduled for circumcision. They reported a significant reduction in vaginal lubrication following circumcision, from 78% to 63%, but found no statistically significant differences in "general sexual satisfaction, pain during vaginal penetration, desire, [or] vaginal orgasm".<ref>{{REFjournal
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08683.x
|date=June 2009-06
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|date=1976
|accessdate=
}}</ref> Bailey ''et al''. report that there is a preference by women for circumcised men, mentioning that the circumcised penis enters a woman more easily and is less likely to cause injury to the vagina.<ref>''AIDS Care''. 2002 Feb;14(1):27-40. The acceptability of male circumcision to reduce HIV infections in Nyanza Province, Kenya. Bailey RC, Muga R, Poulussen R, Abicht H. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11798403&dopt=Abstract]</ref>{{Verify source|date=October 2008-10}}
== Summary of research findings (Wikipedia table) ==
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|date=September 2008-09
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|date=April 2008-04 |accessdate=2008-04-16 April 2008
}}</ref>
| Used biological vibration measurement instrument to determine sensitivity
|publisher=circumcision Information Reference Library
|website=Foreskin Sexual Function/Circumcision Sexual Dysfunction
|date=2013-07-30 July 2013 |accessdate=2019-09-28 September 2019
|format=
|quote=