Interesting to read how foreskin myths keep popping up. The nerve endings in the foreskin become erotic only around the frenulum and close to the glans. The nerves in the tip of the foreskin are for dectecting fine movement, such as invasion of ants or more likely flies etc.
A foreskin should retract easily on erection and most males have frely retractable foreskins that lock behind the glans as intercourse progresses. There is a loss of friction and sensation for both the male and female if the foreskin keeps sliding back and forth since intercourse becomes simply masturbation in the vagina for the male and fails to meet the high points of a dildo for a woman. The circumcised penis offers many benefits for both partners although having sex with an unprepared women is easier for both in the uncut state!
The glans' nerve endings respond to deep pressure which causes involuntary contractions in the perineal muscles, increasing the blood volume and thus size of the penis. This helps drive the need to ejaculate. The tension in the frenulum and direct stimulation of the corona are major erotic stimuli. Circumcised and uncircumcised males when masturbating MOSTLY put tension on the shaft skin and JUST brush the corona and rarely rub the glans. Circumcised guys get the advantage of direct stimulation, on the in and outstrokes, something that is much less commonly experienced in uncircumcised men.
As for the comment above about the fallacies in the Masters and Johnson's work, that is just wishful thinking on the part of someone trying to justify being uncircumcised. Their study, however imperfect, has been backed up by other well done studies showing that circumcision does not decrease a male's erotic feelings. Indeed, the cutline becomes a highly charged area, perhaps defying immediate explanation.
I am constantly amazed at the anger uncircumcised men have towards the circucmcised and the complete opposite from the circumcised. Why is that? There are very few vitriolic attacks from the cut guys on this subject. A casual perusal of these and other forums, not to mention medical journals, show that it is the uncircumcised penis that suffers many problems from painful erections, torn frenulums, inability to retract at all-- a SERIOUS problem that, despite one guy's comment above, is NOT normal and NOT okay-- it increases the risk of penile cancer dramatically!!! What an ignorant comment. Last- as for the Grand Designer-- He asked His chosen people to remove the foreskin!!! So, invoking that "argument" is a dead ender!
As a previous foreskin owner, I regret only that I waited as long as I did to remove the impediment to a better sexual experience. As a physician, I was taught that it was imperative to remain natural under almost any circumstances... the Aussie medical profession, I finally realized does not know what a normal penis is really like and dismisses men with serious penile problems with arrogance and ignorance, NEVER admitting that a circumcised penis might be a major improvement over the natural state, and that it might be its optimal state.
For those of you happy with your natural state, great!!!!!--- but to those of you who insist on making your improved brethren feel inferior, quit it! Without having experienced the circumcised state, you cannot know with any authority how to critique the effects of circumcision. For the most part we cut guys virtually never ask for you opinion. I responded in this forum to the know-it-alls above who love to dismiss the clear value of the circumcised penis with the fervor of attacking Visigoths...:smile:
