- Home
- Find a Therapist
- Topic Streams
- Get Help
Mental Health
Addiction
ADHD
Anxiety
Asperger's
Autism
Bipolar Disorder
Depression
Eating Disorders
Insomnia
OCDPersonality
Passive Aggression
Personality
ShynessPersonal Growth
Happiness
Goal Setting
Positive PsychologyRelationships
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
SexEmotion Management
Anger
Procrastination
StressFamily Life
Adolescents
Child Development
Elder Care
Parenting
SiblingsRecently Diagnosed?
Diagnosis Dictionary
- Magazine
- Tests
- Psych Basics
- Experts
Last month, I finally finished my 20-city book tour to promote What's Up Down There? Questions You'd Only Ask Your Gynecologist If She Was Your Best Friend (Woo-hoo! Trumpets blare! Cymbals crash! Phew). But i realized that I never posted a juicy post that I wrote in the fall at the beginning of the tour... and gals, is it a good one. Read More
Nerve endings
"There are 8000 nerve endings in the clitoris, dedicated exclusively to female pleasure. The penis only has 4000"
Untrue, the male foreskin houses 20,000 nerve endings. I suppose your statement could be true of circumcised guys.
lol what bollocks.
lol what bollocks.
4,000 Erogenous Nerves
It's true there are around 8,000 erogenous nerve endings in the clitoris and around 4,000 in the glans penis (head). The Sorrells et al study of 2007 (and published in the British Journal of Urology) found the foreskin to be by far the most sensitive area of the natural penis. Indeed, the five most sensitive areas of the foreskin are more sensitive than the most sensitive area of the circumcised penis. It's estimated there are between 20,000 to 70,000 erogenous nerve endings in the foreskin alone. So perhaps a little unfair to attribute only 4,000 nerve endings to the penis, but the mistake is understandable and perhaps close to accurate for the penis of a poor chap who's been circumcised.
The nerves in penis vs.
The nerves in penis vs. clitoris statement caught my eye too and is what let me to the comments! Glad someone else has the foreskin info covered! Thanks!
Thank you for posting this, I
Thank you for posting this, I was thinking the same thing! We don't cut off women's clitoris so let's stop cutting off infant boy's foreskin...it SERVES A PURPOSE!!! Leave the human body the way God made it!
You mean...
...leave the human body the way it evolved!
They wrote "God", so I'm
They wrote "God", so I'm guessing *that's* what they meant. How about growing up (or "evolving" if you prefer) and showing respect for other people's beliefs and ways of expressing themselves, even if you don't agree with them.
Female circumcisions occur
Female circumcisions occur around the world, no anesthetics, unsterile conditions and instruments, sometimes even a piece of glass or an old tin can...things are cut off others are sewn up all to preserve virginity and monogamy.
Female circumcision is
Female circumcision is horrible and illegal in underage girls. There is a form of FGM called clitoral unhooding that is a big money maker in cosmetic surgery practices around the USA. It is exactly like male circumcision. The only problem is that clitoral unhooding is illegal in underage girls. Circumcision of underage males is perfectly ok. Isn't this misandry or sexist?
Thank You, James! The first
Thank You, James! The first thing that came to my mind was exactly that! Many people, especially in cultures that routinely circumcise their males, don't realize the foreskin is the most sensitive part of the male body. Most doctors, nurses and healthcare professionals in the US do not learn about the functions of the natural, intact penis or how to care for one.
Why do you say 'poor chap
Why do you say 'poor chap who's been circumcised' as if this is such a bad thing? Male circumcision has many benefits, not only to the man but also to his partner. Did you know that in cultures where men re routinely circumcised the rates of cervical cancer amongst women are significantly lower than in those cultures that do not practice male circumcision?
Because that "poor chap" has been mutilated
Even if your data WERE correct (it's not), 90+% of cervical cancers are caused by an STD. The only way to prevent cervical cancer, among other STDs, is to practice abstinence or safe sex, not forced surgery on a helpless infant.
The circumcised man has lost up to 15 square inches of the most sensitive tissue on his body, rife with thousands of nerve endings (the most pleasurable part of his body). The glans of the penis becomes keratinized and loses even more sensitivity due to exposure to the environment. The glans is meant to be an INTERNAL organ, and exposing it to the air, to your pants, to your underwear, to sex, to masturbation, will continue to erode its sensitivity over time. If you're circumcised, you will never be able to recover all that was taken from you, but at least you can regain some sensitivity with foreskin "restoration" (the practice of gradually stretching the skin of the shaft over the glans, to mimic the protection offered by the foreskin). While it won't regain the specialized nerve endings, it will at least restore some level of sensitivity to the glans. So yes, "poor chap" indeed!
If you, as an adult, wish to have penile reduction surgery, that's your choice -- it's your body and you can do what you want to it. But there is NO excuse to perform foreskin amputation on a newborn (especially when there's no way to determine the penile size the boy will eventually achieve as an adult!). It's genital mutilation, pure and simple, and should be relegated to the history books -- made illegal just as all forms of female genital mutilation are in the US. Aren't boys just as important, and deserving of protection, as girls are?
Calm the hell down.
Being circumsized is absolutely acceptable and people don't curse their parents for the decisions they made for them at birth. In fact, a lot of men are turned away and laughed at or scare women off if they are not circumsized. I'm sure there are plenty of men thanking their parents for having such a thing done as an infant instead of having to risk this procedure as an adult. Maybe you're ashamed of your circumcision, but you need to BACK OFF and lay off the coffee.
YOU calm down
I don't think the intent was to attack circumsized males... I myself am a circumsized male, and you are correct, i don't curse my parents for it. But look a little at what you are saying....that it is OK to take a newborn...days old...and subject them to a trauma none of us would want to face. There is no reason for infant circumcision, it is an ancient practice. As far as maled being chastized or made fun of, that is a commentary on the rediculousness of society, and the victorian era thinking and uneducated thinking in our society. If we were more open about our bodies and our sexuality, then thes chastizement would not exist. also consider that neo-natal circumcision may account for more infant deaths than car accidents or suffocation according to a recent study. Educate yourself, and be a part of the solution...educate others that the uncircumsized penis is not something to be scared of, but is actually the natural state of things.
Circumcisn
AS a young man, asked my memtor about the reason us men get circumsized: Jewish practice, all organ parts were created for a purpose. I'm old, never was laugh at for having 'extra' skin.
Agree with U.
YOU calm down...
I don't think the intent was to attack circumsized males... I myself am a circumsized male, and you are correct, i don't curse my parents for it. But look a little at what you are saying....that it is OK to take a newborn...days old...and subject them to a trauma none of us would want to face. personally i would rather have had the choice as an adult...because at least then there would have been some anesthesia. There is no reason for infant circumcision, it is an ancient practice, brought back in the victorian era. As far as males being chastized or made fun of, that is a commentary on the rediculousness of society, and the victorian era thinking and uneducated thinking in our society. If we were more open about our bodies and our sexuality, then the chastizement would not exist. also consider that neo-natal circumcision may account for more neo-natal deaths than car accidents or suffocation according to a recent study. Educate yourself, and be a part of the solution...educate others that the uncircumsized penis is not something to be scared of, but is actually a natural state of things.
Um . . . we were talking about female anatomy.
Amazing how you guys can make the comments for an article on Vaginas all about you and your penis. You just can't handle not being the center of the universe for one moment, can you?
And by the way, you sound infantile--shut up, no YOU shut up. I'm tellin' mom!
Grow up, OK? It's time.
Um . . . we were talking about female anatomy.
Amazing how you guys can make the comments for an article on Vaginas all about you and your penis. You just can't handle not being the center of the universe for one moment, can you?
And by the way, you sound infantile--shut up, no YOU shut up. I'm tellin' mom!
Grow up, OK? It's time.
Um... I'm a woman
I know people don't always read the name of the authors, but I'm most definitely a woman. I am, as my name implies, also a wife and mother. I read the article. As an woman who has taken the time to educated herself about her own body (and taught my daughter to do the same), I didn't learn anything new, and found several points I could even actively disagree with. I'm just pretty well overall disgusted by a so-called medical "professional" propagating false or misleading information. And, as many other commenters have pointed out, there are quite a few instances of both in this article.
Why should we be calm about the suffering of helpless children?
Even if we assume I wasn't "calm" (though I've no clue what gave you that impression), why *should* I be calm about the pain and suffering of children? You say the "risk of this procedure as an adult" as if that's somehow worse than it is for an infant. It's not. As an adult, the foreskin is no longer adhered to the glans, so it's not as traumatic (imagine ripping your fingernail off -- that's what it's like). Also, get this, they *anesthetize* an adult. As opposed to circumcising infants without anesthesia (any form of anesthesia is only used in approximately 40% of infant circumcisions, and testing has shown that it is ineffectual at best). Additionally, an adult can recognize when they are in post-surgical pain and take appropriate pain medication. A child can't tell you if he hurts, and they usually don't give the boys anything anyway, because nearly all pain medications are contraindicated in infancy. Most importantly, though... it's HIS body. HIS. HE should have the choice.
Being circumcised is fine -- if it's what YOU want. Men do all sorts of things to their penises, but they do it because that is what THEY want to do. Strapping an infant down to a table and traumatizing them is not the same thing. I do not understand how any rational, compassionate person, could even attempt to make that comparison.
Your assertion that "people don't curse their parents for the decisions they made for them at birth" is completely false. I don't know where you're getting that belief from. Hundreds of thousands of men are currently attempting foreskin restoration. Because they are upset at what was done to them, against their will, *for no medical reason*.
I recommend that people start with this post: http://wreckingboy.livejournal.com/318545.html The author is extremely articulate, he's gathered an extraordinary amount of information in one place, and he's "one of you" -- meaning he is a circumcised man, who had his own sons circumcised, who has since learned the truth... and regrets both what was done to him and what he allowed to be done to his own children.
I say poor chap because...
I say poor chap because a circumcised man is missing part of his penis. He's an amputee. His penis neither looks, functions or feels the way it's supposed to. He will never know the complete sexual experience, as nature intended. A circumcised man has a smaller, diminished and damaged penis.
I know this to be true. This awful practice was inflicted upon my defenseless self. I took the time to REALLY look into the issue and was appalled.
It would be nice to think there was something to be gained - some kind of health benefit - but sadly there is not. All the claims of improved health are myths and lies.
Cervical cancers:
http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/letters/1996-02_ACS/
discussion of the genitals.
when i was growing up, i was always told they were the "no-no parts" or other equally stupid term. btw, i am a guy and have no problem talking openly about the genitals or about sex. there are however a LOT of people who are uncomfortable with the subjects. after reading the article it came as no surprise about how little i actually knew about the vagina, etc. the thing i have noticed about discussing different parts of the body is that the more they are discussed, the less people are shy about discussing them. as it is, the majority of people are still stuck in the "old days" where discussing the private parts is still a "no-no". maybe someday in the future people will be able to shed their backward beliefs and talk freely.
great article btw. very informative.
Exactly
Yes you are right, the foreskin has upwards of 20,000 nerve endings. Since a lot of older men are circumcised I guess 4,000 sounds about right. Sad though they don't know what they are missing and neither do their women :(
What their missing...
I'm a woman who has been with both circumcised and uncircumcised males. I never really noticed a difference so I'm not sure their wives are missing out on anything.
You're not sure... most of us are...
So... how about making sure NO ONE has to go without ANYTHING?
20,000 N.E.'s or less...?
Ha! Nice, when someone throws an extra factoid in there to stimulate re-evaluation of our beliefs, eh? Well, here's the dubiously relevant, or semi-relevant question that appeared in my mind upon reading the above reply: who wants to have sex with an uncircumcized guy, anyway? [Ha, I'm just curious and fishing for honest responses; I have not yet read an answer to this question. I am one hetero Joe, BTW. ]
A better question would be "who WOULDN'T want to be with an intact man?
My husband is circumcised. He's also the single best lover I've ever had -- and trust me when I say I have a broard range of experience. The sex is fantastic because of our physical and emotional chemistry, and because of the way our bodies fit together. I would take sex with him over sex with an intact man any day. BUT I know from experience that the sex WITH HIM would be better for both of us if he were intact.
The reason some men and women are uncomfortable/unwilling/disinterested in having sex with an intact man is because they have little to no experience with an intact man. Just as women from European countries where circumcisions are very rarely performed prefer intact men. Americans are used to circumcised penises. And either out of habit, or ignorance, or just plain bigotry, they aren't comfortable with something they're not used to.
Additionally, they've been all but brainwashed into believing that a circumcised penis is "cleaner.". And who wants to have sex worth a dirty penis??? So unless they can overcome a lifetime of indoctrination, they would be hesitant to have sex with an intact men -- and if they DID, they'd be predisposed to dislike it. Sadly, because of lies and/or misinformation, they have no idea what they're missing!
The foreskin helps to maintain natural vaginal lubrication. A wet vagina is a happy vagina! The natural gliding motion of the foreskin feels good to the woman, too. For gay men, and even women, anal sex requires less artificial lubrication (and sometimes requires NO additional lubrication!). An intact man does not need the same type of stimulation to achieve orgasm that a cut man does, so they thrust in a slightly different manner. One that naturally and instinctively hits the g-spot (or prostate) in an incredibly pleasant way.
So... Yeah. Who wouldn't want to?
THIS is why...
http://youtu.be/uaRBVOnflCM
Watch that video (it's a CGI illustration of the function of the foreskin). That will explain, better than I can, why having sex with an intact man is so pleasurable.
As you said, why the
As you said, why the hullaballoo?
My point of view: they have certain things in common but they are all different; it depends on the owner and it's what is in her mind that really matters.
Post new comment