# how does circumcision cause E.D. in adults?



## ElliesMomma (Sep 21, 2006)

can anyone speak to this assertion?


----------



## Greg B (Mar 18, 2006)

Erectile disfunction is a complex issue that can have many causes, including psychological. I have not read anything specific in a peer reviewed medical journal regarding erectile disfunction being caused by circumcision.

What I can say, from my reading and experience is that as a circumcised male, sexual pleasure is much harder to achieve, especially past the age of 40. It is very likely, in my mind, that circumcsion could contribute to any erectile problem, making it harder to acheive a fully erect penis, harder to maintain an erection, and much harder to reach climax. This is simply because a circumcised man has had the most important part of his sexual anatomy amputated. If you do not have all your euipment, you have a much harder time doing things. Just like it takes a whole lot more work and time to chop down a tree with a hatchet compared to a felling axe.

Regards


----------



## hakunangovi (Feb 15, 2002)

I have read that, in general, circumcised men will start to experience sexual difficulties approximately ten years earlier than their intact counterparts. This is not surprising since most of the fine touch nerves are located in the foreskin, so the circumcised male has already lost three quarters of his "sensitivity". See www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/Sorrells-2007 . Some would argue saying that premature ejaculation is a common problem in circumcised males - which is true. However this is caused by the severing of the nerves connecting the fine touch receptors of the foreskin and the brain which allows an intact man to get feedback and "regulate" himself. Basicaly sex to a circumcised man is all about the destination, whereas an intact man gets to enjoy the ride first. Secondly, without the protection of the foreskin the glans of a circumcised male gets keratinized and dries out, so that what had been a very thin layer becomes about eight times thicker and buries what few nerves there are (located around the sulcus) www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/cold-mcgrath/ . This is an ongoing process, so that by the time a circumcised man is in his fifties there is often little feeling left. It is also generaly recognised that a circumcised man will be rougher on his partner www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/ahara/ .

One only has to look at the tremendous market in North America for Viagra, Cialis etc. We are bombarded with commercials on TV on an hourly basis. I have not observed the same phenomenom in Europe.

Other articles that may be of interest include the one written by Christianne Northrup: "How circumcision may be affecting your love life" at www.boystoo.com/medicalconversion.htm . See also www.drmomma.org/2009/10/how-male--circumcision-impacts-your-love.html and the article that appeared in Mens Health magazine many years ago: www.noharmm.org/separated.htm .


----------



## AnnDMFT (Dec 18, 2010)

I am thinking of writing a blog on this very subject, so I will definitely be interested to see what people have to say!


----------



## K703 (Dec 15, 2008)

Another likely contributing factor to circumcision and ED is the fact that circ cuts off blood vessels and forces them to find alternate routes, which probably don't hold up as well as the natural series of arteries and veins in an intact penis.


----------



## erin23kate (Apr 16, 2009)

*http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/shen1/*



*[Erectile function evaluation after adult circumcision]*

[Article in Chinese]

*Shen Z, Chen S, Zhu C, Wan Q, Chen Z.*

Department of Urology,
First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine,
Zhejiang University,
Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310003,
China.
[email protected]

*OBJECTIVE:* To evaluate the erectile function of adults after circumcision.

*METHODS:* Ninty-five patients were investigated on erectile function by questionnaire before and after circumcision, respectively.

*RESULTS:* Eighteen patients suffered from mild erectile dysfunction before circumcision, and 28 suffered from mild or moderate erectile dysfunction after circumcision (P = 0.001). Adult circumcision appeared to have resulted in weakened erectile confidence in 33 cases (P = 0.04), difficult insertion in 41 cases (P = 0.03), prolonged intercourse in 31 cases (P = 0.04) and improved satisfaction in 34 cases (P = 0.04).

*CONCLUSIONS:* Adult circumcision has certain effect on erectile function, to which more importance should be attached.

PMID: 14979200 [PubMed - in process]

[CIRP Comment: This study, unfortunately, was published in Chinese. We have only the English language abstract to guide us. Circumcision is uncommon in China, so these 95 men apparently were circumcised to treat a medical condition with a problem prepuce. Circumcision resulted in erectile dysfunction in 28 (28.4%), weakened erectile confidence in 33 (34.7%) difficult insertion in 41 (43.1%), prolonged intercourse in 31 (32.6%), and improved satisfaction in 34 (35.7%). It is likely that the inproved satisfaction resulted from being freed of the medical condition and the problem prepuce, not from the circumcision. This study tends to confirm the earlier findings of Fink _et al._]


----------



## serendipity22 (Sep 19, 2006)

A small number of infants have a small artery in their penis cut during circumcision. Its seems possible to me these boys could have an increased risk of ED in later life.

Circumcision universally reduces blow flow in the penis. Many blood vessels have been removed or damaged. The erect circumcised penis is shorter and narrower in girth. It seems likely the chance of ED in later life are increased.


----------



## AXEius (Jul 8, 2006)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hakunangovi*
> 
> I have read that, in general, circumcised men will start to experience sexual difficulties approximately ten years earlier than their intact counterparts. This is not surprising since most of the fine touch nerves are located in the foreskin, so the circumcised male has already lost three quarters of his "sensitivity". See www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/Sorrells-2007 . Some would argue saying that premature ejaculation is a common problem in circumcised males - which is true. However this is caused by the severing of the nerves connecting the fine touch receptors of the foreskin and the brain which allows an intact man to get feedback and "regulate" himself. Basicaly sex to a circumcised man is all about the destination, whereas an intact man gets to enjoy the ride first. Secondly, without the protection of the foreskin the glans of a circumcised male gets keratinized and dries out, so that what had been a very thin layer becomes about eight times thicker and buries what few nerves there are (located around the sulcus) www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/cold-mcgrath/ . This is an ongoing process, so that by the time a circumcised man is in his fifties there is often little feeling left. It is also generaly recognised that a circumcised man will be rougher on his partner www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/ahara/ .
> 
> ...


exactly, if you can hardly feel your penis why would you get aroused!?


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

Well said!


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

And were you aware that the sale of artificial lubricants is a big business in the U.S? In places where circumcision is not the norm, this is not the case. Coincidence? I think not. That is because an unaltered penis has it's own natural means to keep the glans moistened and sensitive, so no need for anything artificial. I think nature had it all figured out and humans do not have the right to interfere.


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

And not only that, the foreskin of a newborn baby is actually attached to the infant glans and nature "un attaches" it usually by age 5, but it can be as late as the teen years. Do we really believe that "cutting" these delicately designed genitals is a good thing to do to babies? NO.


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

Good for you. You are one of the lucky ones!


----------



## Dan Bollinger (Aug 13, 2006)

The mechanism is unknown, but the association is strong. Here's the abstract for an article I wrote that will be published in the next few months. Like the Shen article, is shows the same link from circumcision to ED. ED is pshychosomatic, that is, having psychological and physiological components.

*Alexithymia and Circumcision Trauma: A Preliminary Investigation*

*Background: This preliminary study investigates what role early trauma might have in alexithymia acquisition for adults by controlling for male circumcision. Methods: Three hundred self-selected men were administered the Toronto Twenty-Item Alexithymia Scale checklist and a personal history questionnaire. Results: The circumcised men had age-adjusted alexithymia scores 19.9 percent higher than the intact men; were 1.57 times more likely to have high alexithymia scores; were 2.30 times less likely to have low alexithymia scores; had higher prevalence of two of the three alexithymia factors (difficulty identifying feelings and difficulty describing feelings); and were 4.53 times more likely to use an erectile dysfunction drug. Conclusion: Alexithymia in this population of adult men is statistically significant for having experienced circumcision trauma and for erectile dysfunction drug use.*


----------



## Keith Rutter (Jul 18, 2011)

As a 65 year old man, I can say from bitter experience that an older cut penis is a lot less usefull. Mine is good only for urination, as it can take an hour to reach an orgasm, this has been getting worse since my 40s. I realise that as people get older, their bodies become less effective, and the lost foreskin results in a much less sensitive penis as the Meissner corpuscles which are so important for satisfactory intercourse, are lost. Add to this older woman's drier vagina, and you have a combination of deterioration.


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

Very interesting information. Where will this article be published?


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

That is unfortunate. Again I ask, why is it that men are so eager to do this to their sons? Also, at least there is some help for vaginal dryness and some erectile/orgasm problems and that is testosterone therapy for men and bio identical hormone therapy for women. The problem is that even if you have a good libido with the help of testosterone, the effects of missing foreskin and the less sensitive glans, creates a situation just as you describe. I don't like the word "deterioration" ...... it just sounds so bleak. I just wonder what the solution is? just give up? Settle for less, or nothing? Ignore it? Put the energy in your relationship to some other use? I found the website, NORM (National Organization of Restoring Men), last night and I hope there are some solutions to be found there.


----------



## Dan Bollinger (Aug 13, 2006)

See: Bollinger D, Van Howe, RS. Alexithymia and circumcision trauma: A preliminary investigation. _Int J Men's Health,_.2011;10(2) (in press).


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

Thanks, I look forward to reading your article!


----------



## Keith Rutter (Jul 18, 2011)

It is true that vaginal lubricants CAN help especially temporarilly, but none that I can buy are as good as the natural action of an intact penis. KY Jelly is often recommended but it is after all intended for inserting catheters etc., not repeated thrusting by a dry penis for as long as it takes to achieve orgasm. in my case up to an hour. My wife has dried out long before then and I've become numb, not to mention the strain on the rest of our bodies.


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

I still believe in, where there's a will, there's a way....but it does take two to make it happen. If you have already given up, that is your choice, but I think it is sad.


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

You make a lot of sense with your statements. I think one reason that no one is interested in doing such studies on older men, is that with most older men deficient in the male hormone, testosterone, there most likely is not the interest in doing the study! If more older men were interested in such a study, it would have been done already. Lacking such a study, your points make a lot of sense, since those are actually facts about the male sexual response in aging men. What is sad is that when talking about the after effects of cutting a young baby boy or child, no one is talking about what can happen when he gets older, only that oh, it won't affect his sexual function as a grown male. This is like saying well, if he can at least function, produce children, and get some pleasure out of it..... he works just fine! I wonder why no one wants to hear the truth about how being cut actually affects the performance of his natural penis? And how it just might affect his female partner? That is the cruelty of it. Yet people still defend it!


----------



## DJay (Sep 10, 2006)

As noted on the NORM site, there is foreskin restoration. It's better than doing nothing for the circumcised male.


----------



## Keith Rutter (Jul 18, 2011)

I certainly hope that my sexlife has not petered out permanently, but as you say, restoring it is a two-person project. I keep trying to improve things, manual tugging is my main technique at present, tape tensioning devices depend on the tape holding on skin which is not perfectly dry, and I look forward to being able to use a tapeless method in due course. I don't know if a topical cream to stimulate the few remaining nerve endings would be available.


----------



## hakunangovi (Feb 15, 2002)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mare54*
> 
> You make a lot of sense with your statements. I think one reason that no one is interested in doing such studies on older men, is that with most older men deficient in the male hormone, testosterone, there most likely is not the interest in doing the study! If more older men were interested in such a study, it would have been done already. Lacking such a study, your points make a lot of sense, since those are actually facts about the male sexual response in aging men. What is sad is that when talking about the after effects of cutting a young baby boy or child, no one is talking about what can happen when he gets older, only that oh, it won't affect his sexual function as a grown male. This is like saying well, if he can at least function, produce children, and get some pleasure out of it..... he works just fine! I wonder why no one wants to hear the truth about how being cut actually affects the performance of his natural penis? And how it just might affect his female partner? That is the cruelty of it. Yet people still defend it!


Actualy I think there would be a lot of interest in a study, but in our culture of sexual prudery, most people are too embarrassed to talk about it. I think that for many older men, it is not so much a lack of testosterone and a lack of desire, but a lack of feeling and sensitivity that results in ever increasing difficulty reaching orgasm. E.D. is only a part of the equation. Delayed or absent ejaculation is the other part.

Mare, you are right to sound incredulous that the custom of circumcision is still defended by so many, but I put that down to ignorance (being uninformed), since the medical community has been, and still is very reluctant to tell the truth and inform their clients of the facts relating to the consequences of cutting off foreskins. It is a very lucrative part of their business.


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

At least you are doing something, rather than just giving up and settling. But you are right that it takes a team effort, and in a team, there are two people who are involved and really care about each other. I think it is a real shame for anyone to give up on solving a problem and especially if it could make a big difference in their relationship. I just read that the most reported cases of sexual dysfunction (certainly many are not) are of men who were born between 1945 and 1965, when the circumcision rate was at an all time high of 80%! I think there is a clear correlation between these two facts. I also read that the circumcision rate in the U.S. is about 32% now, and falling which is very good news. IT's all about education and without being informed, this barbaric, unfair practice will continue to be done on helpless little baby boys around the country. And Keith: there is a product out there that is available called "Manhood", which is a cover for the penis, which is worn most of the day and night which claims it can help restore the sensitivity of the glans. It's not expensive and it's endorsed by NORM. Anything is worth a try! Good Luck.


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

Unfortunately, aging does have it's bummers. One of them is the drop off of testosterone for men which lowers their capacity for sexual performance as well as their libido. It doesn't have to be that way, because it is an easy thing to do, for a man to get testosterone therapy today and it is very effective. But, you are right the other side of the story is the desensitizing of the glans on a man with a circumcision. There is more information out there about this now than ever before. For a sexual organ that is supposed to by nature, be hidden, where it keeps it's moisture and is protected from chaffing from clothes, etc., circumcision alters that to be outside of the skin. Very un natural and the effects of this on older men is undeniable! Fortunately men can restore foreskin, but it is a tedious job and takes a long time. Many men won't have the desire to go through all of that, but from what I have read, it is very successful. The book, The Joy of Un circumcising, is a very informative book, and the part called "Mens Voices", is enough to bring you to tears! I highly recommend it.


----------



## SteveBennett (Aug 9, 2011)

The *frenulum* is the key to it all. Cut that bad boy off and you're cutting off the part of the body scientifically proven to be fundamental to erection, ejaculation and urinary continence. Here's the story.

Sorrells et al (2007) showed that circumcision ablates the most sensitive parts of the penis, this may or may not include the *frenulum* depending on the nature of the cut but it is nonetheless a highly sensitive part. Sensitivity is only half the answer, what really matters is how that part is innervated.

Yang and Bradley (1999) showed that the *frenulum* is innervated almost exclusively by the *perineal nerve*, not the dorsal penile nerve - see figure 1. Where does the perineal nerve go?

Uchio et al (1999) showed that the two nerve routes are independent and reference other works to state:

"The motor efferents of the perineal nerve innervate the *pelvic floor musculature, including the bulbocavernosus muscle*.[8] The *contribution of the perineal nerve to urinary continence and ejaculations have been well described*.[4], [9] ... The *frenulum, which is innervated by the perineal nerve has been shown clinically to require a lower threshold for induction of erection and ejaculation*,[12] and *histologically to have higher numbers of genital receptors than other areas of the penis*.[13]"

If you need more convincing Apostolidis and Fowler (2002) presented a case report of a guy whose perineal nerve was damaged during vasectomy - his dorsal nerve was completely fine, and yet "The patient reported the *absence of reflexogenic and morning erections* but preserved psychogenic erections, *decreased ejaculatory force and orgasmic ability*. He had also had secondary depression"

I've been arguing about this with urologists for years for my own case. I finally found one that believed me but of course there was nothing he could do for me. If you can use the results of my investigations to publicise these medical *facts* and stop people circumcising then please do.

Uchio's references:

4. Dick, H. C., Bradley, W. E., Scott, F. B. and Timm, G. W.: Pudendal sexual reflexes: electrophysiologic investigations. Urology, 3: 376, 1973.

8. Takahashi, M. and Sato, T.: Innervation of the anterior perineal muscles and its morphological consideration. Anat. Anz., 158: 65, 1985.

9. Shafik, A.: Perineal nerve stimulation for urinary sphincter control. Experimental study. Urol. Res., 22: 151, 1994.

12. Sarkarati, M., Rossier, A. and Fam, B.: Experience in vibratory and electroejaculation techniques in spinal cord injury patients: a preliminary report. J. Urol., 138: 59, 1987.

13. Halata, Z. and Munger, B.: The neuroanatomical basis for the protopathic sensibility of the human glans penis. Brain Res., 371: 205, 1986.


----------



## Dan Bollinger (Aug 13, 2006)

Steve, That's as good a hypothesis as I've heard. From what I've read so far, reading between the lines, both Yang and Uchio used circumcised men for subjects. Is that true? It would certainly skew their results. Nonetheless, they seem to have found a link even using mutilated penises. The newest of the articles you cite regarding the perineal nerve is 2002. I have to wonder what has been done since?


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

Thank you for all that information. I asked my husband why more men are not speaking out about these things, and he told me, well men are trained from little boys not to cry. So I guess that means that they are also trained to refrain from complaining about these things and most of them, just plain don't talk about it.


----------



## crosstitchgirl (Jul 12, 2011)

don't know yet if i am having a little boy or girl but i have made it clear to my hubby that i dont want our son cut. this has become a touchy area with him because he does want our boy cut. his reason , he dont want his boys to look different than him. i try to explain what cutting will do to to our sons later in life if we have it done. i dont have any thing to really back me up thou as i have not really looked up any books or papers showing the effects of cutting. i know in my heart of hearts it does effect men thou . i cant till you how much trouble it must be causing for us in the bedroom at night. any links to some good websites on this subject?


----------



## mama24-7 (Aug 11, 2004)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crosstitchgirl*
> 
> don't know yet if i am having a little boy or girl but i have made it clear to my hubby that i dont want our son cut. this has become a touchy area with him because he does want our boy cut. his reason , he dont want his boys to look different than him. i try to explain what cutting will do to to our sons later in life if we have it done. i dont have any thing to really back me up thou as i have not really looked up any books or papers showing the effects of cutting. i know in my heart of hearts it does effect men thou . i cant till you how much trouble it must be causing for us in the bedroom at night. any links to some good websites on this subject?


this article is for you, only. http://www.udonet.com/circumcision/vincent/vulnerability_of_men.html

gotta run. check the sticky for more resources but you probably need to back off, maybe way off, for a while, depending on how pregnant you are.

sus


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

Does anyone know any current information about the company "Foregen" (I think that is the spelling)? Supposedly it is a company looking to do a trial on foreskin regeneration and it sounds very interesting.


----------



## serendipity22 (Sep 19, 2006)

A good way of looking at it is that a penis is a very delicate piece of equipment and its not designed to have pieces carved off it.


----------



## japonica (May 26, 2005)

I wish more there was more of this discussion, really. Many of the mothers of circed boys that debate elsewhere contend that their sons made it through the procedure "just fine" and they have no problems whatsoever.

But do they have a crystal ball? How will it affect their son's sex life? Will it contribute to ED and other problems later in life? That's what astounds me. He won't be a little kid forever.


----------



## philomom (Sep 12, 2004)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *japonica*
> 
> I wish more there was more of this discussion, really. Many of the mothers of circed boys that debate elsewhere contend that their sons made it through the procedure "just fine" and they have no problems whatsoever.
> 
> But do they have a crystal ball? How will it affect their son's sex life? Will it contribute to ED and other problems later in life? That's what astounds me. He won't be a little kid forever.


I agree. Some of my girlfriends circed their babies and they have a spiel about how he came back from the procedure not even crying. They then struggle to breastfeed and have to rip at his little penis at every diaper change to avoid adhesions. So sick. I can't imagine how one feels about their privates if every diaper change is painful.


----------



## LonelyPageTurnr (Oct 18, 2011)

I think one of the biggest reasons I'm a bit of an outsider here is because of my distaste for so many studies posted as evidence against circumcision. This study size is too small to be relevant, and if someone pro-circ posted a study showing that the foreskin caused some kind of harm (cancer, for instance), then it would be dismissed because of the sample size.

There's a lot of speculation on this issue, but not really any hard evidence.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erin23kate*
> 
> *http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/shen1/*
> 
> ...


----------



## LonelyPageTurnr (Oct 18, 2011)

If this were the case, why can men get erections throughout puberty and most of their adult life? Further, if this were the case, why do drugs like viagra and cialis (which work on the blood vessels) restore sexual function for so many men?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SteveBennett*
> 
> The *frenulum* is the key to it all. Cut that bad boy off and you're cutting off the part of the body scientifically proven to be fundamental to erection, ejaculation and urinary continence. Here's the story.
> 
> ...


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

I don't think that studies are even necessary or pertinent. The science is solid on the purposes of natural foreskin and with all the ED in our society it isn't rocket science to figure out the negative effects of choppiing off an important part of a mans sexual anatomy! A first grader could understand why cutting on a baby's body is wrong.........forget the "studies"........look at what makes sense.


----------



## hakunangovi (Feb 15, 2002)

I agree. The Sorrells study (linked above) states that the five most sensitive locations on a normal penis are lost to circumcision. Fewer nerves = diminished function. Secondly, as mentioned previously, the glans becomes an external organ, which causes it's surface skin to become keratinized and many times thicker, burying what nerves there are; mostly located on the sulcus). This process is ongoing and the affect are cumulative. That is why we continualy hear young (circumcised) men proclaim that their sex life is fantastic, but ask him how he's doing when he hits 60!!

Also, E.D. is just one part of the equation. delayed or absent ejaculation affect many men, and I do believe that drugs such as Viagra do squat for that affliction.


----------



## mare54 (Jul 18, 2011)

So true.... Absent or delayed ejaculation problems are not uncommon problems in ED, but often not talked about. Viagra can work on the erection but often an ejaculation is not reached. Testosterone replacement can be as effective as Viagra, but it has NO effect on the cumulative effects of sensation loss due to circumcision in the older man.


----------



## xoomxoom (Sep 5, 2007)

Do you suppose it also might have something to do with the loss of sensitivity (as in the skin is no longer regularly protected and becomes "tougher", dryer, etc.. than it was meant to be)?


----------



## xoomxoom (Sep 5, 2007)

Viagra and Johnson & Johnson, with the Gates Foundation? Nah.......


----------



## weiluonika (Aug 29, 2011)

This thread has been such an interesting read. I am vehemently anti-circumcision, and I had heard about circumcision and ED being connected, but I had not found any studies supporting this (until now!) Though, it always made sense to me that cutting off the most sensitive part of the penis, and combining that with the drop in testosterone that comes with age, WOULD be associated with ED. It just seems like common sense.
Quote:



> Originally Posted by *japonica*
> 
> I wish more there was more of this discussion, really. Many of the mothers of circed boys that debate elsewhere contend that their sons made it through the procedure "just fine" and they have no problems whatsoever.
> 
> But do they have a crystal ball? How will it affect their son's sex life? Will it contribute to ED and other problems later in life? That's what astounds me. He won't be a little kid forever.


I have had the circ debate with other women on other forums, and the problem is that most of them think it is creepy and gross to be concerned with their sons' future sex lives. It's very sad.


----------



## hakunangovi (Feb 15, 2002)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xoomxoom*
> 
> Do you suppose it also might have something to do with the loss of sensitivity (as in the skin is no longer regularly protected and becomes "tougher", dryer, etc.. than it was meant to be)?


This is a small part of it - the glans is supposed to be an internal organ, and when circumcision makes it exposed the surface becomes keratinized and many times thicker and drier than it is supposed to be.

HOWEVER, the main reason is that the foreskin is a not only the most sensitive part of a penis, but also a complex structure with neural connections to the brain that allow an intact man to feel where he is at. See:

www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/sorrels_2007/

www.cirp.org/library/normal/


----------



## texian (Mar 1, 2013)

That infant circumcision can result in impotence for men older than 60 - or even younger - is interesting to older men and their wives. But I know of no real research on this issue. The point has been made that the tremendous use of Viagra and other phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors does suggest American men have a big problem with potence and, the problem gets worse in the older age groups.

Research on the pleasure receptors on the inside of the foreskin
would suggest that complete loss of the foreskin can result in some diminishing of pleasure in sex. In the late 19th century when some doctors were promoting routine infant circumcision many of them said it would prevent masturbation, knowing something then about the sexual pleasure provided by the foreskin. The frenulum, which is a band of tissue under the glans that connects to the foreskin, can be left intact in circumcision, but it is often removed also.

On http://intactnews.org/node/138/1319461990/acquisition-erectile-dysfunction-circumcision they say "The perineal nerve runs the length of the penis on the underside and terminates in the frenulum. This "little bridle," which attaches the underside of penis shaft to the inner foreskin, is one of the most sensitive portions of the penis and is solely innervated by the perineal nerve....Circumcision partially or completely excises the frenulum, always severing the nerve at this point. This variable frenular aspect, and the fact that there are other, compounding risk factors, might explain why not all circumcised men suffer from ED." In other words, whether the frenulum is removed and the
perineal nerve is cut in circumcision determines to a considerable extent whether impotence will result as the man gets older.

Taylor J.R., Lockwood A.P., Taylor A.J. The prepuce: specialized
mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. British Journal of
Urology, 1996;77:291-295.

Hill G. Foreskin motion generates Meissner corpuscle stimulation. BMJ
2003; Rapid response: 16 December.

Fink KS, Carson CC, DeVellis RF. Adult Circumcision Outcomes Study:
Effect on Erectile Function, Penile Sensitivity, Sexual Activity and
Satisfaction. Journal of Urology 2002;167(5):2113-2116.

They studied 123 men who were circumcised as adults, and "...found
that adult circumcision appears to result in worsened erectile
function, decreased penile sensitivity and improved satisfaction."

While this study has the advantage of men being able to compare their sexual pleasure before and after circumcision, the study has a problem in that the men were circumcised because of medical conditions such as an extremely tight foreskin. Perhaps many of the men reported they were satisfied with their circumcision because it corrected their
painful conditions.

Now, in 2013 not many people remember that the Baby Boomer males were the first American generation who were almost all circumcised as infants. Many men born in more rural and small town parts of the country in the thirties were not
circumcised - because they were born at home, and in Texas and the states of the Great Planes many births at home were attended by the country doctors, who, as a rule, did not circumcise. Not much is known now about those country doctors.

http://www.cirp.org/library/general/laumann/

Laumann et al (1997) did a survey on 1511 men in 1992 who were then age 18 to 59 years, to get an estimate of the rate of infant circumcision for the years 1933 to 1974. These men were born from 1933 to 1974.

They say that "..the steady increase in circumcision rates among respondents during much of this period reflects the increase identified by other investigators. The proportion of newborns that were circumcised reached 80% in the years after World War II and climaxed in the mid 1960s. This rise mirrors the increasing prevalence of hospital births."

Their graph shows that in 1933 about thirty-three percent of American men were circumcised, but by 1941 about sixty-five percent were circumcised and by 1944 the rate rose to around seventy percent. Their graph shows that the rate for hospital births for the entire country rose from about forty-five percent in 1938 to around 85 percent in 1950.

Although they do not show the hospital birth rates by state and by urban verses rural and very small town areas, the rate of people born in hospitals during the thirties and early forties was higher in the urban areas than in rural and very small town areas of the country. So, since the circumcision rate parallels the hospital birth rate, we can expect that during the period of about 1930 to 1945, the circumcision rate in rural and small town areas was lower than in urban areas.

This data implies that during the period of about 1930 to 1938, circumcision was still not widely practiced in rural and very small town areas, especially in the states of the Great Planes and West Coast. A man born in the rural areas of the Great Planes and Texas during the thirties, up to perhaps about 1938, would more likely be uncircumcised rather than circumcised, because he was born at home..


----------



## Greg B (Mar 18, 2006)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crosstitchgirl*
> 
> don't know yet if i am having a little boy or girl but i have made it clear to my hubby that i dont want our son cut. this has become a touchy area with him because he does want our boy cut. his reason , he dont want his boys to look different than him. i try to explain what cutting will do to to our sons later in life if we have it done. i dont have any thing to really back me up thou as i have not really looked up any books or papers showing the effects of cutting. i know in my heart of hearts it does effect men thou . i cant till you how much trouble it must be causing for us in the bedroom at night. any links to some good websites on this subject?


Totally unsupportable reason. Using this argument simply confirms that he is being emotional about something that happened to him that he has not yet figured out how to deal with. You do not need to do anymore than work throught this fallcious argument with your husband.

Take the argument a little further and you can easily see how it falls apart. Say you DH has a beard. What does he propose to do so that his son looks like him? Glue a beard on your infant son? Shave his beard? What about his hairy gentials? Is he going to start shaving? Wait, what about his hairy under arms? Better shave them too. Hold on, your DH is so much taller than his infant son, geeze, how will he handle that? That is a stumper... And what if your DH was missing an arm or leg? Would he even, for a secon,d consider amputating your son's healthy, valuable arm or leg? I didn't think so.

If you DH was really concenred about how your son will react if he sees he is different than your husband, then your husban should restore his foreskin...

It makes no sense at all to amputate a healthy body part, that is the most important and critical for sexual feeling and function, for the sake of your DH's feelings and insecurites. Your DH needs to dig deep and sort out his own feelings on this matter, rather than simply get emotional and use the "two wrongs make a right" argument.

Regards


----------

