The post title is obviously tongue-in-cheek and a bit click bait. But it’s a serious topic.
I find it interesting that circumcision is controversial. It just seems that such a potentially life altering procedure ought to be up to the individual involved.
I ended up in a discussion about it earlier on Facebook, so I did a little digging.
“But cut men don’t know what they don’t know”
Yes, except for the ones who for whatever reason get cut after being intact and having sex. They overwhelmingly report negative experience after. Hard to claim they just don’t know what they’re talking about.
Moreover, many men have undergone restoration (just the skin, can’t restore the 20,000 lost nerve endings) and I haven’t looked into it thoroughly but they report a more positive experience with foreskin.
These men, and women who have been with both, are the only ones with any authority worth listening to on the matter.
After all is said and done, what really matters is the science, and the science says that nearly all men who get cut later in life regret it. Moreover, women who have been with both report 1) they achieve vaginal intercourse orgasm twice as often (60% vs. 30%) with uncut, 2) get wetter, 3) experience less discomfort, 4) have more multiple orgasms, 5) have multiple orgasms in more encounters, and 6) have intercourse that lasts 50% longer.
Whether evolution or “God’s” creation, seems there’s damn good reason to be intact.
The effect of male circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female partner
BJU International (1999), 83, Suppl. 1, 79–84 K. O’HARA and J. O’HARA
An excerpt:
These results show clearly that women preferred vaginal intercourse with an anatomically complete penis over that with a circumcised penis…
Seems kinda clear to me.
