===========================================================================
To begin with, the study is scientifically flawed. And the answer to that question depends on just how narrowly one defines "dysfunction." If one means only ED, then I will concede that, however overwhelmingly likely it is that the procedure is indeed a major culprit, there is as yet no absolutely definitive answer. However, the definition should apply to all aspects of sexual performance, including masturbation and intercourse. As for the first one, watch numbers of j/o vids. See the way a few circumcised men have a comparatively easy time of it, but many have to go through penis-punishing pressure and complicated hand/finger movements to achieve what for intact men is easy and comfortable. The need for lubricant in itself indicates some dysfunction. For the significant dysfunctions in heterosexual intercourse, I refer again to
www.sexasnatureintendedit.com. There one will also learn that the above-quoted study's last sentence makes sense only if one considers, say, intoxication rather than sobriety "an advantage rather than a complication" to clear thinking...not to mention to sexual activity. Ask many a woman how much she enjoys being pummeled interminably with hard, jolting jackhammer jabs, enduring that treatment until the circumcised man can finally reach orgasm. The foreskin allows a man to stroke more gently and to time his "ejaculatory latency" much more accurately. And then there's the
big dysfunction of losing most of one's penile sensitivity through the sadistic removal of most of the pleasure-giving nerves and structures in the foreskin. The glans itself is
not the most sensitive part--not even when it remains internalized and protected, as biology intended, rather than being externalized to dry out and keratinize.