Does Circumcision Decrease Sexual Sensitivity?

By Sarah Tennant The effects of routine infant circumcision on penile sensation and sexual function are significant, one reason foreskin restoration is becoming more common. Throughout history the reduction of sexual sensitivity due to circumcision was an acknowledged fact. Routine infant circumcision was popularised in America by Dr Kellogg as a preventive against masturbation – his theory being that the extra effort required to attain orgasm due to decreased sensitivity would cause teenage boys to give up the practice. Biological Factors Affecting Sexual Sensitivity and Circumcision That circumcision would reduce sexual sensation makes sense biologically. Stripping the glans of its protective foreskin effectively turns it from an internal to an external organ. Over time the originally moist, soft mucosa becomes pale as the skin builds up thicker layers to protect the delicate surface from abrasion against clothing. While circumcision results initial hypersensitivity of the glans, over time the keratinisation of its surface makes the glans less sensitive. Removing the foreskin also, not surprisingly, means that the circumcised man can no longer enjoy sensations from the specialised nerves amputated during the procedure. Nor can the foreskin function as intended during sex, providing gliding and rolling sensations a circumcised man necessarily lacks. As circumcision has become the norm in America, the sexual effects of circumcision have been downplayed, if not outright dismissed. Advocates of circumcision point to a number of studies in which circumcised men reported being happy with the procedure or feeling no less sensitive after circumcision. However, these studies are methodologically questionable. One major Louisiana study by S Collins et al declared circumcision in adult men resulted in no reduced sensitivity – after testing the subjects only 12 weeks after circumcision with no follow-up. This failed to address the contention by other researchers that keratinisation results in long-term loss of sensitivity. Other studies have committed flaws such as ignoring the foreskin altogether when comparing sexual sensitivity in intact and circumcised men (Clifford B Bleustein et al, Masters and Johnson), or conflating reported sexual experience with objective measurements of sexual sensitivity. While sexual experiene after circumcision is certainly a worthy area of study, cultural attitudes toward circumcision, beliefs about circumcision from men willing to undergo the procedure in adulthood and varying degrees of circumfetishism make these reports far less clear than commonly reported (Godfrey Kigozi et al, Kriezer JN, et al). Some older studies even demonstrate their bias by referring to the foreskin as “redundant prepuce”! Numerous studies show that the reassuring line “There’s no difference” is false; in fact, circumcision in infancy, childhood or adulthood has significant effects on sexual sensitivity. Objective Measurements of Penile Sensitivity After Circumcision A study published in BJU International in 2007 (Morris L Sorrells et al), measuring fine-touch pressure threshholds in the adult penis, concluded that the glans of the intact man is significantly more sensitive than the glans of the circumcised man. After mapping the areas of the penis, including the foreskin, most sensitive to fine touch pressure the researchers declared “Circumcision ablates [removes] the most sensitive parts of the penis”. This study was criticised for the researcher’s intactivist stance (and strangely, for their measuring the foreskin’s sensitivity); however, the results have been corroborated by non-intactivist researchers Yang DM, et al - “Circumcision Affects Glans Penis Vibration Perception Threshhold”. Perceptions of Sexual Sensitivity After Circumcision Another BJU Internation study by D Kim and M Pang, surveying 373 sexually active men, concluded: “There was a decrease in masturbatory pleasure and sexual enjoyment after circumcision, indicating that adult circumcision adversely affects sexual function in many men, possibly because of complications of the surgery and a loss of nerve endings.” - Kim, D. and Pang, M., "The Effect of Male Circumcision on Sexuality," BJU International 99 (2007): 619-22. Some men, indeed, are so affected by the loss of their foreskin – physiologically, psychologically or both – that they have “restored” their foreskins via non-surgical techniques. This restoration cannot adequately duplicate the sexual apparatus of an actual foreskin, but it can cover the glans to promote dekeratinisation and provide the rolling action a circumcised penis lacks. Yet other polls indicate some men are very happy with their circumcisions. This data is intriguing given the objective sexual losses to circumcision. The results may be partially due to circumcisions performed due to existing sexual dysfunctions, to social or sexual pressure to circumcise, to delayed orgasm and consequent increased partner satisfaction after circumcision, or in some cases to circumfetishism. It is clear that sexual pleasure is psychological as much as physiological. Given the mixed results of the data, it seems ethically incumbent upon parents to allow their sons to make their own decisions about circumcision in adulthood. Reasons Not To Circumcise Your Baby further explores some of the bioethical issues with routine infant circumcision.

share this article to: Facebook Twitter Linkedin Digg

Posted by Health Care , Published at 10:19 AM and have 0 comments