Circumcision may not reduce sensitivity of penis
- Thread starter hzs3fg
- Start date
halcyondays
Worshipped Member
I am a statistical outlier in terms of size. I have no way of knowing if I would have been a statistical outlier in terms of sensitivity, but I was never given the option because my genitalia were mutilated at birth.
The unspoken conclusion of this study is "it's okay to mutilate the genitals of baby boys."
It does not answer the ethics of the question of whether we should allow anyone to cut bits off male babies without medical necessity.
The unspoken conclusion of this study is "it's okay to mutilate the genitals of baby boys."
It does not answer the ethics of the question of whether we should allow anyone to cut bits off male babies without medical necessity.
halcyondays
Worshipped Member
"The foreskin of intact men was more sensitive to tactile stimulation than the other penile sites..."
Quoted directly from this study, it tacitly admits that removal of tissue and the nerve endings within results in a loss of sensitivity.
Quoted directly from this study, it tacitly admits that removal of tissue and the nerve endings within results in a loss of sensitivity.
There is no way I can believe that the glans of cut guys is as sensitive as those of intact guys. Mine feels totally numb while my partner's (and any other intact guy whose penis I've played with) is crazy sensitive (judging by reactions when touched). I call hogwash!!
I'm proud of my circumcision! Have a nice mark that I like where it was done
Precisely. The issue with circumcision is NOT whether or not it affects sensitivity of adult men. That stuff is so subjective and there are SO many other factors that go into sexual pleasure. The issue is why do we keep doing this to children without any medical problems why why why why why
People can spin this any way they want. The cold hard facts are that this is in fact child abuse if performed before 18. I've heard some red redness say it does affect sensitivity, and other say that it doesn't.
Regardless of it does or does not, it should he person's choice. No 2 ways about this thing.
Regardless of it does or does not, it should he person's choice. No 2 ways about this thing.
I am curious about the methods used - my reading of this is that is inconclusive. It sounds like the question was o"on a scale of 1 to 10 how pleasurable or painful is this?" Assuming these men have had sex, which is probably a ten for them, it isn't at all surprising that they would find having a warm wand or some prodding with a wire about as pleasurable between cut and uncut dudes. They compare it to their 10, and presumably most actions suck compared to that. Tactile heat and sensitivity are fine, but the pressure corpuscles on the foreskin are the argument for it, and warmth and running a wire over it measure part of that. And nothing seems to have gone for deep pressure on the penis.
I still haven't read a scientific study with a realistic comparison. This does not appear to be one.
"
The scientists tested the men for tactile and heat sensitivity of the penis at four points: the midline shaft, the area next to the midline, the glans and, for the uncircumcised, the foreskin. As a control, they also tested a site on the inside of the forearm.
Uncircumcised and circumcised men did not differ in sensitivity to touch or temperature at any of the four sites tested, and sensitivity at the forearm was lower than any penile site for both groups.
While pain thresholds at the foreskin did not significantly differ from any other site, the foreskin was more sensitive to temperature detection than the glans but less sensitive than the shaft.
"
Circumcised dudes - you love your penis, and so do I, this isn't a judgment.
I'm fascinated by this topic and the differences in pleasure we feel. This study appears to me to have been constructed by an idiot - why would you not measure tactile sensitivity at the circumcision scar, and why would you look at heat sensitivity which is irrelevant to sexual pleasure.
It seems self-evident that cutting off one of the two most sensitive parts of the penis (glans and foreskin) will reduce overall pleasure for the foreskin owner. Having lost the foreskin already (many of you americans) - enjoy what you have and move on(or restore if you will). Good luck.
I still haven't read a scientific study with a realistic comparison. This does not appear to be one.
"
The scientists tested the men for tactile and heat sensitivity of the penis at four points: the midline shaft, the area next to the midline, the glans and, for the uncircumcised, the foreskin. As a control, they also tested a site on the inside of the forearm.
Uncircumcised and circumcised men did not differ in sensitivity to touch or temperature at any of the four sites tested, and sensitivity at the forearm was lower than any penile site for both groups.
While pain thresholds at the foreskin did not significantly differ from any other site, the foreskin was more sensitive to temperature detection than the glans but less sensitive than the shaft.
"
Circumcised dudes - you love your penis, and so do I, this isn't a judgment.
I'm fascinated by this topic and the differences in pleasure we feel. This study appears to me to have been constructed by an idiot - why would you not measure tactile sensitivity at the circumcision scar, and why would you look at heat sensitivity which is irrelevant to sexual pleasure.
It seems self-evident that cutting off one of the two most sensitive parts of the penis (glans and foreskin) will reduce overall pleasure for the foreskin owner. Having lost the foreskin already (many of you americans) - enjoy what you have and move on(or restore if you will). Good luck.
I got it done at age 40 due to Phimosis that had progressed to the point of my not being able to retract while soft and from my first erection I was NEVER able to retract it when erect which due to reasons I have written about in other threads such as this I did not even know it was supposed to retract when erect.
So I unlike most in this debate had absolute "before and after" experience. More than 20 years of sex before and more than 15 years since and I can say for me that there was absolutley NO "loss in sensitivity" but it did elimiate the "foreskin tearing issues" which I experienced from the start which often made sex painful if the woman was at all tight painful to the point I would sometimes have to stop before cumming and more than once a night was never on the menu.
I do not reget it at all not one little bit and wish I had not procrastinated about it for all those years.
Plenty of guys just like me have said over and over in forums such as this the same thing I am saying.
This is not "seems self evident" "theory: for us we KNOW how it was before and we KNOW how it is now.
NONE of you self evident theorist uncut guys can say that.
So I unlike most in this debate had absolute "before and after" experience. More than 20 years of sex before and more than 15 years since and I can say for me that there was absolutley NO "loss in sensitivity" but it did elimiate the "foreskin tearing issues" which I experienced from the start which often made sex painful if the woman was at all tight painful to the point I would sometimes have to stop before cumming and more than once a night was never on the menu.
I do not reget it at all not one little bit and wish I had not procrastinated about it for all those years.
Plenty of guys just like me have said over and over in forums such as this the same thing I am saying.
This is not "seems self evident" "theory: for us we KNOW how it was before and we KNOW how it is now.
NONE of you self evident theorist uncut guys can say that.
I agree that it should be down to each man to decide whether to get cut or not and that it should not be done routinely to children.
I got cut by choice last year and have to say I have not lost any sensitivity at all. Had kept my foreskin pulled back for years before getting cut so for me there has been no change.
Just wondering whether for some guys who were cut as a child, perhaps it helps you to know that your sensitivity could still be the same as it is now, even if you were still intact.
I got cut by choice last year and have to say I have not lost any sensitivity at all. Had kept my foreskin pulled back for years before getting cut so for me there has been no change.
Just wondering whether for some guys who were cut as a child, perhaps it helps you to know that your sensitivity could still be the same as it is now, even if you were still intact.
I too have experienced both having had the op almost 3 years ago. I had a tight frenulum which stopped full retraction of foreskin and caused discomfort - tried having it rolled back to loosen it but eventually went for the full circumcision. No regrets at all. Haven't really noticed a loss of sensitivity with the head, it is still very sensitive, especially when hard, but not overly so which is a good thing. The back where the remains of the frenulum are is more sensitive than before and the inner foreskin which is now fully exposed (although bunches up when soft) adds to the sensitivity. Overall sex feels better.
I'll weigh in. I'm not cut And I've had times where I've pulled the skin back and held it there for hours. There is a significant decrease in sensitivity. Like if I try to put on underwear with my foreskin pulled back I can't without it feeling uncomfortable. Chafing etc. if I leave my glans exposed for hours I can finally put underwear on after the sensitivity has died down
Hey, wow, a civil circumcision thread.
Honestly, I find the idea that there's no reduction in sensitivity ridiculous. Of course there's a loss. There's a significant amount of sensitive tissue cut off. That sensitivity is permanently reduced. Doyyy.
Whether pleasure is reduced is totally different. Pleasure is constructed in the brain, not at the site of stimulation. I can't think of any (reliable) way to test how circumcision affects that.
Honestly, I find the idea that there's no reduction in sensitivity ridiculous. Of course there's a loss. There's a significant amount of sensitive tissue cut off. That sensitivity is permanently reduced. Doyyy.
Whether pleasure is reduced is totally different. Pleasure is constructed in the brain, not at the site of stimulation. I can't think of any (reliable) way to test how circumcision affects that.
There really isn't. How do you account for emotional state, health, previous sexual experiences, kinks, interest in partner, interest in situation, subjective experience of sexual stimulation, etc.? You can't. There are SO MANY variables that go into "going from zero to cum" that it is impossible to untangle or isolate how ONE of them impacts the whole process. The only way to solve this definitively would be to do really unethical stuff -- like raising identical twins with the exact same stimuli and experiences to develop their sexual responses to be as similar as possible, and then circumcising one as an adult and doing a long term study of the results.
It doesn't matter how many anecdotes guys trot out about "how they love being cut" either. I have a feeling that most guys who elect for adult circumcision are going to be happy with it regardless, because they have a fetish for it. Duh.
I 100% disagree with men that got circumcised as an adult only liking it because we have some sort of fetish. I wont go into details as to why I actually like to be this way (you can go research my hundreds of posts on this). Folks make it seem that you cant be a sane person and like being circumcised...sigh...
I can not speak for anyone else but it was not some sort of "fetish" for me.
If everything had been fine from day one I doubt I would have done it and even as it was I put off what proved to be the solution for at least 10 years from when I first seriously thought about.
Maybe just maybe "sensitivity" and "pleasure" are two different things but most most anti-circer's that trot that out equate the too or try and suggest the equation of the two and gee it is the worst thing in the world and how everything would be so much better if only you still had that foreskin.
What is all this "sensitivity" we supposedly no longer have but can not tell we have ever lost supposed to have done for us?
But for sake of discussion lets just say that in the biggest sense of the definition there is an "overall" "loss of sensitivity" someplace but from a practical "having sex" aspect if it is the same or as is my case better, then so what?
If it is just as pleasurable, you still get it up just fine, you don't take longer to come but it is not quicker either we come just as hard and just as long when we do if you suffered "foreskin tearing issues" can now enjoy and seek out tight rather than avoid it, can do it mulitple times if/when the woman wants to. Find women are WAY more likely to go down on you than before when at least half the time would start heading that way take a look and then it was MAYBE a HJ and no it was NOT a "cleanliness issue" it was because for years I was the first uncut guy any of them had ever been with, I was in my mid 30's before I slept with a 40 something woman who had ever been with another uncut guy and she had only been with one.
If everything had been fine from day one I doubt I would have done it and even as it was I put off what proved to be the solution for at least 10 years from when I first seriously thought about.
Maybe just maybe "sensitivity" and "pleasure" are two different things but most most anti-circer's that trot that out equate the too or try and suggest the equation of the two and gee it is the worst thing in the world and how everything would be so much better if only you still had that foreskin.
What is all this "sensitivity" we supposedly no longer have but can not tell we have ever lost supposed to have done for us?
But for sake of discussion lets just say that in the biggest sense of the definition there is an "overall" "loss of sensitivity" someplace but from a practical "having sex" aspect if it is the same or as is my case better, then so what?
If it is just as pleasurable, you still get it up just fine, you don't take longer to come but it is not quicker either we come just as hard and just as long when we do if you suffered "foreskin tearing issues" can now enjoy and seek out tight rather than avoid it, can do it mulitple times if/when the woman wants to. Find women are WAY more likely to go down on you than before when at least half the time would start heading that way take a look and then it was MAYBE a HJ and no it was NOT a "cleanliness issue" it was because for years I was the first uncut guy any of them had ever been with, I was in my mid 30's before I slept with a 40 something woman who had ever been with another uncut guy and she had only been with one.
Not a surprise. If it did reduce sensitivity all the adult males that had it done would be screaming and suing their doctors claiming their sex lives are ruined but that's just not the case.
Let me rephrase that: any guy who goes for an ELECTIVE adult circumcision is gonna like it.
An adult is either going to get cut because he has to because he has problems with his foreskin that make sex worse; or because he wants to. In both cases, the guy is going to be happier cut than uncut. Both you guys had severe cases of phimosis, and of course any guy is gonna be happy to not have to deal with THAT anymore.
Similar threads
