Changes

| date=March 1999

| accessdate=

== Penile sensitivity and sexual sensation ==

A number of studies have looked at the question of whether sensitivity of the glans is affected by circumcision.

| last=Sorrells

| first=Morris L.

| 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."

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

| date=June 2000

| accessdate=2006-07-09

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

}}</ref>

Sorrells ''et al.'' (2007) measured the fine-touch pressure thresholds of 91 circumcised and 68 uncircumcised, adult male volunteers, They reported "[the] glans of the uncircumcised men had significantly lower mean (sem) pressure thresholds than that of the circumcised men, at 0.161 (0.078) g (P = 0.040) when controlled for age, location of measurement, type of underwear worn, and ethnicity."<ref name="sorrells"/> In a letter to BJU International, however, on the basis of the unadjusted data, Waskett and Morris stated "we find no significant differences [...], consistent with previous findings."<ref name="waskett2007">{{REFjournal

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| 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

| coauthors=

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

}}</ref>

Payne ''et al.'' (2007), in a study of the glans and shaft sensitivity of twenty circumcised and twenty uncircumcised men, reported that "No differences in genital sensitivity were found between the uncircumcised and circumcised groups."<ref name="payne2007">{{REFjournal

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

}}</ref>

Some recent researchers have asserted that the [[foreskin]] may be sexually responsive.<ref>{{REFjournal

| coauthors=

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| DOI=

| accessdate=

}}</ref><ref>{{REFjournal

| coauthors=

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| DOI=

| accessdate=

}}</ref><ref name="taylor">{{REFjournal

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

}}</ref><ref name="taylorcold1999">{{REFjournal

| quote=

| pubmedID=

| pubmedCID=

| DOI=

| 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]] 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}} — 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

| coauthors=

| quote=

| pubmedID=

| pubmedCID=

| DOI=

| accessdate=

}}</ref> This gliding action was also described by Lakshmanan (1980).<ref>{{REFjournal

| issue=

| quote=

| pubmedID=

| pubmedCID=

| DOI=

| accessdate=

}}</ref>

Sorrells ''et al.'' (2007), in the study discussed above, measured fine-touch pressure thresholds of the penis, and concluded "The transitional region from the external to the internal prepuce is the most sensitive region of the uncircumcised penis and more sensitive than the most sensitive region of the circumcised penis. Circumcision ablates" (removes) "the most sensitive parts of the penis." According to Sorrells ''et al.'', the five penile areas most sensitive to fine-touch are located on the foreskin.<ref name="sorrells" /> This is disputed by Waskett and Morris, who argue that when they re-analyse Sorrells' data, no significant differences are found; that light touch is only one form of sensitivity, and that sexual pleasure may sometimes require less sensitivity. They also criticized Sorrells' recruitment methods.<ref name="waskett2007"/> In response, Young criticizes Waskett and Morris's use of the [[Bonferroni correction]] and argues that the methods of selecting subjects would not affect the results, that the two most sensitive positions on the circumcised penis represent small areas of [[circumcision scar]], as compared to a much larger area of sensitive tissue on the foreskin, and that sales of sensation-dulling products do not necessarily indicate that such are widely used other than on scar tissue.<ref name="young"/> 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>{{REFjournal

| first=

| coauthors=

| url=

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

Boyle ''et al.'' (2002) argued that circumcision and frenectomy remove tissues with "heightened erogenous sensitivity," stating "the genitally intact male has thousands of fine touch receptors and other highly erogenous nerve endings&mdash;many of which are lost to circumcision."<ref name="boyle2002">{{REFjournal

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| DOI=

| accessdate=

==Erectile function==

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

| url=

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| DOI=

| accessdate=

}}</ref> or decrease,<ref name="cortes2009"/><ref name= "richters2006">{{REFjournal

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

}}</ref><ref name="Laumann1997"/> in erectile dysfunction among circumcised men, while other studies have shown little to no effect.<ref name="masood2005"/><ref name="krieger2008">{{REFjournal

| first=

| coauthors=

| url=

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

}}</ref><ref name="kigozi2007">{{REFjournal

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

}}</ref><ref name="kimpang2006"/>

Kim and Pang reported no significant difference in erection.<ref name="kimpang2006">{{REFjournal

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

}}</ref>

Cortés-González ''et al.'' reported a statistically significant improvement in erectile function following circumcision (p=0.0007).<ref name="cortes2009"/>

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

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

Collins ''et al.'' conducted a prospective study of 15 adult circumcision patients, using the Brief Male Sexual Function Inventory (BMSFI). The authors did not find a statistically significant effect on ejaculation scores.<ref name="Collins2002"/>

In a study of 42 Turkish men circumcised for religious reasons, Senkul ''et al.'' 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

| quote=

| pubmedCID=

| accessdate=

}}</ref>

== Sexual practice and masturbation ==

In a study by Korean researchers of 255 men circumcised after the age of 20 and 18 who were not circumcised, Kim and Pang reported that masturbatory pleasure decreased in 48% of the respondents and increased in 8%. [[Masturbation|Masturbatory]] difficulty increased in 63% but was easier in 37%. They concluded that there was a decrease in masturbatory pleasure after circumcision.<ref name="kimpang2006"/>