View Full Version : Male Circumcision Reduces Female Pleasure
neostudded
03-09-2008, 01:05
Hey, I wanted to share this information with other parents.
Effects of male circumcision on female arousal and orgasm
While vaginal dryness is considered an indicator for female sexual arousal disorder, male circumcision may exacerbate female vaginal dryness during intercourse. O'Hara and O'Hara reported that women who had experienced coitus with both intact and circumcised men preferred intact partners by a ratio of 8.6 to one. Most women (85.5%) in that survey reported that they were more likely to experience orgasm with a genitally intact partner: `They [surveyed women] were also more likely to report that vaginal secretions lessened as coitus progressed with their circumcised partners.'
Presence of the movable foreskin makes a difference in foreplay, being more arousing to the female. Women reported they were about twice as likely to experience orgasm if the male partner had a foreskin. The impact of male circumcision on vaginal dryness during coitus required further investigation.
We conducted a survey of 35 female sexual partners aged 18 to 69 years who had experienced sexual intercourse with both circumcised and genitally intact men.
Participants completed a 35-item sexual awareness survey. Women reported they were significantly more likely to have experienced vaginal dryness during intercourse with circumcised than with genitally intact men
Women who preferred a circumcised male sexual partner averaged 27.3 years of age (SD = 8.2), while those whose stated preference was for a genitally intact partner had a mean age of 36.4 years (SD = 13.7). Thus, the role of the male foreskin in preventing loss of vaginal lubrication during intercourse may become more discernible with increasing age among women. We reported:
`During intercourse, the skin of an intact penis slides up and down the shaft, stimulating the glans and the nerves of the inner and outer foreskin. On the out stroke, the glans is partially or completely engulfed by the foreskin with more skin remaining inside the vagina than is the case with the circumcised penis. This `valve' mechanism is thought to retain the natural lubrication provided by the female because the bunched up skin acts to block the lubrication escaping from the vagina, which results in dryness.' Our work, which supports the hypothesis of Warren and Bigelow and the findings of O'Hara and O'Hara about the role of the male prepuce during coitus is fully reported in Denniston et al.
Research generally has not considered possible adverse effects of male circumcision upon female sexual arousal and response. While Moynihan reported that vibratory thresholds, blood flow and hormone levels were studied, there was no mention of circumcision status of the male partner. Likewise, Leiblum failed to control for male circumcision status. In light of published findings, this is a serious methodological omission.
Most likely, reported vaginal dryness and the related clinical designation `female arousal disorder' is but a normal female response to coitus with a man with an iatrogenically deficient penis.
It is imperative that future studies of female arousal disorder record and control the circumcision status of male sexual partners
http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/bensley1/
sam's mum
03-09-2008, 06:11
and another thing, does noone realise that they make condoms 'ribbed for her pleasure'... d'uh!
~Emmylou~
03-09-2008, 08:42
Wow neo that's really interesting research.
Thanks for posting it.
Ana Gram
03-09-2008, 10:11
Interesting theory. Though it is quite possible that the 35 women in this study just had bad sex.
In my own private research, it doesn't make a difference.
FiveInTheBed
03-09-2008, 15:31
Interesting theory. Though it is quite possible that the 35 women in this study just had bad sex.
In my own private research, it doesn't make a difference.
:laughing:just pictured you in a white coat and taking notes whilst ...ummm....sorry:p
yep I know serious subject...
but I also think it depends on the males awareness of his partners pleasure levels.
Some women can visibly ejaculate and some can't - we're all different.
interesting read though, thanks.
SassyMummy
03-09-2008, 15:36
I don't agree with RIC at all, but I'm not sure I can agree.
I've had sex with 5 different partners, a mixture of all... and nobody seemed to "perform" better depending on whether or not they were circed.
This might be TMI... but my bf at the moment is circed, and I'm far from unimpressed. :p
SorenLorensen
03-09-2008, 16:29
Interesting theory. Though it is quite possible that the 35 women in this study just had bad sex.
In my own private research, it doesn't make a difference.
:laughing: quite possible :cool:
i too am able to conduct a private research of my own on the matter and have come to the same conclusion as chell.
NibbleCurlynBub
03-09-2008, 16:34
Interesting stuff. :yes:
I still like my circumcised man. :)
Not interested in 'sock hood' territory.
But that's just me.
Thanks for the info Neo :thumbsup:
I have only experienced intercourse with circumcised partners so I wouldn't know the difference but it makes perfect sense to me :)
Yet another reason why I would never circumcise a future son if I was to have one.
sorry...
that's codswollop. What a load of baloney.
um, not that is was in me to take specific note, but I did manage to note, that long time ex, was "intact" and long time and current DH is not "intact" and Id be picking my DH over anyone else, and not just because he is around now and we are together.
So I have to say, in my opinion it is ****!:yes:
sorry...
that's codswollop. What a load of baloney.
Yep, from past experiences in my life im going to :iagree::iagree:
kytysmum
03-09-2008, 18:57
Interesting theory. Though it is quite possible that the 35 women in this study just had bad sex.
In my own private research, it doesn't make a difference.
SOOOOOOOOO true :iagree::laughing:
that it doesnt make a difference either way, its the connection with the person that makes it pleasurable.
I have also been with both, it doesnt matter done or not done to be honest its just the connection with your husband/partner etc that matters. Alot of womans dryness also comes from a pychological stand point and isnt always a medical condition but one of problems in other areas of the relationship.
So, as far as research goes I dont believe alot of what I read but go from experience. 90% of woman if asked regarding sex wont even have had an orgasim let alone a good sex life. It depends on how many woman and men you put into the research.
mummeeto2
03-09-2008, 19:15
sorry...
that's codswollop. What a load of baloney.
:iagree:I think 35 women surveyed is a pretty low number to quantify their research. I mean, you could get another 35 women who've had circ'd & uncirc'd partners who'd say the opposite to the 35 in this study. If the number surveyed was more like 35 000 then I'd be inclined to take the results a little more seriously.
Sorry if TMI but for me dryness is a result of hormones not DH being circ'd
hmm, well its interesting anyway and I would never dismiss it just because I can't really relate it to my own experiences. I probably should have taken more notice, too late to go back and compare now!
DS is uncirced so I am sure he will be glad of that one day. I don't really want to think about that though, lol!! :cool:
Cwazywabbit
03-09-2008, 19:58
Well I'm one of those women who have had both and uncircumsized is much better. I understand why they wouldnt' want that info getting out though. It's not like you can reverse it or anything .........or can you?
I have never had a problem with lubrication but I do notice the difference between 'circ' and 'uncirc'.
None of my boys are circumcized , there was nothing wrong with them when they were born and there is nothing wrong with them now.:D
Could you imagine altering a girls body when born................there would be outcry?
Ashleigh<3
03-09-2008, 20:11
Not interested in 'sock hood' territory.
'Sock hood' :laughing: My goodness!
that it doesnt make a difference either way, its the connection with the person that makes it pleasurable.
:thumbsup:
I don't think it makes a difference, personally. My main concern would be that circumcision reduces a man's chance of catching, [and therefore passing on] HIV by 70%. But luckily I'm having a girl, so I don't have to worry about it.
sam's mum
03-09-2008, 20:29
you know there was a huge uproar at the thought that girls/women might remove hair from their bodies just to be more pleasing to men, but now this is considering whether surgically modified men are more pleasing to women!
SassyMummy
03-09-2008, 21:03
Sam's Mum: Well god knows I don't remove all this bloody hair for my own benefit. I'm happy to spend the week hairy-legged if I'm on my own... not sure the bf would be quite so happy with that though. :p
sam's mum
04-09-2008, 06:15
Sam's Mum: Well god knows I don't remove all this bloody hair for my own benefit. I'm happy to spend the week hairy-legged if I'm on my own... not sure the bf would be quite so happy with that though. :p
that's why I love winter! wear jeans and cover it up. (stuff DH :laughing:)
a few countries that do it to girls? Quite honestly its a persons choice what they do with there bodies. I have 3 boys. 1 to which has been done for a medical reason (hyperspadia-spelling?! It wasnt formed properly anyway and they were concerned for him later in life). Now, I felt terribly guilty that there was something I had done to make one of my twins this way-however it runs in the family (so I was told) on my hubbys side.
My other 2 arent done because its there choice, the same as woman have the choice about her body so do my little men.
I want to teach them its the connection that makes good sexual relationships not whether your done or not. The choices we make with partners is what counts. If by chance either of my other 2 want it done we will pay when they are older and have made an informed decision. In my house we are divided as my hubbys done and thinks its better-as for me I wear the pants on this subject as its there choice as its there body not mine. No one has the right to tell either sex what to do with there bodies. :)
hyperspadia is what my son had the operation for but also the hood wasnt properly formed. Hyperspadia is basically correcting the end-put it this way it goes from a sprinkler to 1 powerful hose (thats how the specialist put it!). Its common with twins and runs in families. :) They never put it in the manual though on having twins! Mind you, theres no way you can prepare for having 2 at once! hehehe:):)
serendipity22
29-01-2009, 12:42
The notion that you could remove so much erogenous tissue and not have any effect on sexuality is a beautiful fantasy.
firsttimemumvmr
09-09-2009, 12:18
:iagree:I think 35 women surveyed is a pretty low number to quantify their research. I mean, you could get another 35 women who've had circ'd & uncirc'd partners who'd say the opposite to the 35 in this study. If the number surveyed was more like 35 000 then I'd be inclined to take the results a little more seriously.
Sorry if TMI but for me dryness is a result of hormones not DH being circ'd
I have to agree completely in that 35 people does not provide a sufficient sample. Furthermore, in my humble opinion, I found O'Hara's affirmations somewhat exagerated. It could well be that her experiences and those of the other women were pretty terrible in the bed department, or some sceptics might argue that she pick on purpose people of her own agenda.
Personally, I totally agree that a lot of the sex experience happens in the mind. Now, for a bit of background, I grew up in the UK where it is not the norm to circumcise all males. My first few partners were all uncircumcised and well, yes, it varies from person to person but I incidentally experience more painful and unsatisfactory sex then. It could well be because I was less experienced then, less in tune with my body and with my partners. My husband was actually circumcised as an infant, pressumably for religious reasons since his mother was Jewish. This could well be a coincidence or it could be that our mental relationship is just very deep but our sex life is frankly fantastic. Of course, he can't really tell if it would have been better or worse with an intact penis because he hasn't had the experience. However, I started doing a bit of research onto this just before my son was born and men who had it done later in life (although there are conflicting views and experiences) often report a slight loss of sensation but not in a negative way. For instance they tend to last longer, which to me is a plus. Most say the experience is different but not necessarily worse, many claim is better but then it's not something I'll never know myself.
I have certainly not have the experience of roughness with my husband, or any pain or discomfort. On the contrary, he's my best lover so far but as I said before the mind may be playing an important part here. I haven't experienced dryness either but again, the attraction between us is very strong. However, I find O'Hara's assertions that circumcised men are terrible lovers completely at odds with my personal experience.
Mrs Nietzsche
09-09-2009, 12:24
Also at odds with my personal experience and I hope the anti-circ movement is not going to rely too much on this research as a reason not to circ.
As a point of interest, I had a partner from a pacific island, there they are circumcised in order to increase female pleasure. They slit the foreskin so it heals in a lump on the shaft, supposed to rub the g-spot.
Lets not get into that debate again!!!!
Interesting theory. Though it is quite possible that the 35 women in this study just had bad sex.
In my own private research, it doesn't make a difference.
:iagree:
Rosebones
09-09-2009, 12:37
Uh hum. I beg to differ.
.
As a point of interest, I had a partner from a pacific island, there they are circumcised in order to increase female pleasure. They slit the foreskin so it heals in a lump on the shaft, supposed to rub the g-spot.
Thats interesting! What age is this circ done?
and in reply to this "study". Did all these 35 women have unportected sex? Maybe they should be working out their odds of STD's not orgasms!
Mrs Nietzsche
09-09-2009, 12:53
Lol
Well he was done at 5.
My husband (fijian) was done at that age too.
You know, I was thinking that the only way this study could be done accurately, would be for the same man to have sex with all 35 women, and then get circumcised, so they could compare and contrast.
well i was thinking that the man should rate the womens orgasms and that will throw another light on it!
Sarieslittlemen
09-09-2009, 13:10
I have been with both circ'd and uncirc'd and it made no difference. If they're good, they're good if they're not, they're not.
firsttimemumvmr
09-09-2009, 14:10
I have been with both circ'd and uncirc'd and it made no difference. If they're good, they're good if they're not, they're not.
This is actually likely to be the closest to the truth :D so I would based a decision on whether or not to circumcise on other grounds instead.
tbizabishaka
10-09-2009, 09:37
Lol
You know, I was thinking that the only way this study could be done accurately, would be for the same man to have sex with all 35 women, and then get circumcised, so they could compare and contrast.
First of all just want to say that I think it's a load of nonsense.
Although I have only had one sexual partner (virgin when I got married) I've had unusual experience of having sex with my husband before and after he was circumsised and it made absolutely no difference.
When we got married (in Africa) Dh was uncircumsised but had always wanted to be. He came from a country where there were allot of muslims who were circ'd and his brothers had been done but not him. When I had returned to Australia and was waiting for him to immigrate he decided to get circumsised at the age of 38yrs old. I was 25years old when I first got married and had sex for a yar before he was circumsised and now am 37 and have had 11years of sexual experience withhim circumsised.
I have to say that I could percieve no difference in sex before or after the circumsission. If I had to make a decission I would actually have to say that I prefer him circumsised. It's a fact that women do sometimes experience dryness, either because of hormones or lack of desire. I guess that if you have a personal issue with dryness then uncircumsised may help slightly but then if intercourse lasted for a lengthy period of time it probably would cancel out. And after all isn't that what personal lubricant is for?
As for sexual satisfaction there is absolutely no difference. Plus I would hope that a man did more than just poke "it" in and out to give me satisfaction. A large number of women need extra stimulation to achieve orgasim and an enjoyable sexual experience should include extra stimulation other than the by the penis.
In conclussion (sorry it's been long) I have heard that men who are uncircumsised are more likely to be hypersensitive and have a problem with premature ejaculation which leaves both partners unsatisfied. I can attest that my husband has been able to last longer after circumsision although it was not really an issue to begin with :). Just some things to think about.
Tess
soph'smum
08-10-2009, 18:58
What a load of hogwash! Agree with the other posters - has made no difference to me.
Hopefully this ridiculous study attracted no public funding!
Interesting theory. Though it is quite possible that the 35 women in this study just had bad sex.
In my own private research, it doesn't make a difference.
:iagree:
MummaBear03
08-10-2009, 19:17
I wouldn't know, haven't been with too many men and the only time no condom was used was the night DD was conceived. Yeah, how's that for luck! So I guess the use of condom would make it not matter if they are circ'd or not.
Interesting theory. Though it is quite possible that the 35 women in this study just had bad sex.
In my own private research, it doesn't make a difference.
:iagree:
BabelFish
08-10-2009, 23:33
Interesting. It's not really a big enough sample, though, to be considered conclusive data.
I am as against male circumcision, and I still find that pretty hard to believe.
Opinionated
08-10-2009, 23:40
I have found men without foreskins to be a little less sensitive and can be rougher with their tool. Sometimes I like that though:laughing:
First of all just want to say that I think it's a load of nonsense.
Although I have only had one sexual partner (virgin when I got married) I've had unusual experience of having sex with my husband before and after he was circumsised and it made absolutely no difference.
When we got married (in Africa) Dh was uncircumsised but had always wanted to be. He came from a country where there were allot of muslims who were circ'd and his brothers had been done but not him. When I had returned to Australia and was waiting for him to immigrate he decided to get circumsised at the age of 38yrs old. I was 25years old when I first got married and had sex for a yar before he was circumsised and now am 37 and have had 11years of sexual experience withhim circumsised.
I have to say that I could percieve no difference in sex before or after the circumsission. If I had to make a decission I would actually have to say that I prefer him circumsised. It's a fact that women do sometimes experience dryness, either because of hormones or lack of desire. I guess that if you have a personal issue with dryness then uncircumsised may help slightly but then if intercourse lasted for a lengthy period of time it probably would cancel out. And after all isn't that what personal lubricant is for?
As for sexual satisfaction there is absolutely no difference. Plus I would hope that a man did more than just poke "it" in and out to give me satisfaction. A large number of women need extra stimulation to achieve orgasim and an enjoyable sexual experience should include extra stimulation other than the by the penis.
In conclussion (sorry it's been long) I have heard that men who are uncircumsised are more likely to be hypersensitive and have a problem with premature ejaculation which leaves both partners unsatisfied. I can attest that my husband has been able to last longer after circumsision although it was not really an issue to begin with :). Just some things to think about.
Tess
I enjoyed reading your post it was very well written :)
I would agree that its a load of BS. The circ'ed men i have been with have been far better than any intact man i have been with.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.