Improved
6112 HealthChanged
3786 LivesSaved
3568 Lives0 lives impacted in the last 24 hrs Learn More
Via Fotolia
I’ll be honest; I had to do a lot of research before sitting down to write this article. I have only come into contact with one uncircumcised penis during my short stint as a single adult woman, and it didn’t really seem to be that big of a deal at the time.
However, when it comes to uncircumcised (commonly spelled "uncercumsized") penises, there’s more than meets the eye . Approximately 50% of men are “uncut,” which is really how the penis is meant to be in the first place (not many men outside the United States are circumcised). Circumcision originated among ancient religious populations as a way to purify man by removing the source of his sexual pleasure. This tradition has held its ground into the 21st century, which can lead to quite a bit of confusion when a woman unexpectedly comes into contact with a penis au naturale.
It may surprise you to learn that the foreskin itself, before it is separated from its owner, is extremely sensitive to pleasure. During circumcision two very important things are removed that will never grow back: the frenulum, the band near the tip of the penis that connects the foreskin with the glans, and then of course, the foreskin and all the nerve endings that go along with it.
Not only are these sources of pleasure eliminated during circumcision, but the shaft of the penis is left unprotected and slowly loses its responsiveness through a process called keratinization. In an article published in Fathering Magazine, Rio Cruz explains that “the male glans and inner foreskin, just like the clitoris and inner labia of women, are actually internal structures covered by mucous membrane that, when exposed to the air and harsh environment through circumcision, develop a tough, dry covering to protect the delicate, sensitive tissue.”
The main difference in having sex with an uncircumcised penis is that the foreskin acts as a glider of sorts, and it stays in place while the glans and shaft continue to thrust. This leads to less friction in the vagina and thus a more pleasurable experience for the female. For circumcised men who are experiencing gradual loss of sensation throughout the course of their lifetime, there actually is a process of foreskin restoration that involves the use of tape and weights (?).
So when all is said and done, you (and your partner) are actually likely to have much better sex with a penis that is uncircumcised. If you’re performing oral sex and looking for tips, just focus your efforts on the ridge just below the glans and use your hand to help the foreskin go with the flow. That's all there is to it!
Add a Comment294 Comments
FACT: women can still have orgasms after even the most severe forms of FGM.
December 15, 2012 - 5:20pmPleasure and Orgasm in Women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) published in Journal of Sexual Medicine, Vol. 4, Issue 6, pp. 1666-78 (Oct. 23, 2007).
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118496293/abstract
This Comment
Robert, It's "perfect" for me..that's all I said. I said "each to his own". I can specify a preference and you can hardly with a straight face say that female circumcision is even in the same ballpark!
March 31, 2010 - 11:27amMale circumcision just removes a piece of skin that is on the outside, whereas femal circumcision deforms and ruins a woman's body and disallows her to have any enjoyable sex in her whole life.
I have never met a circumcised man who didn't love and crave sex and have lots of orgasms!
Look on the internet for descriptions of female circumcision! It is SO not the same.
Female circumcision is about male dominance over women. You can hardly say the same thing about removing the foreskin!
This Comment
'I said "each to his own".' That is exactly what we are saying. Not "to each what his parents think he should be left with" or "to each what the doctors and nurses browbeat his parents into leaving him with". Just "his own", what he was born with.
April 1, 2010 - 5:55pmThis Comment
Female Genital Mutilation and Male Genital Mutilation can be intrinsically the same thing.
But i fail to see how cutting of one gender is any worse than cutting of another.
Are you going to sit here and tell me that it's acceptable to mutilate a male's genitals simply because female genital mutilation is more severe occasionally?
They're both terrible. One is illegal while the other is common. What separates the two exactly? Not enough to say that mutilating a baby girl is ILLEGAL while mutilating a baby boy should be promoted.
All body parts represent a risk to their owner. Even clitorises/breasts/labias... if cut off... would reduce chances of infection or respective cancers. So stop f****ing trying to validate male genital mutilation by saying it's not comparable to an already illegal female genital mutilation you sexist pigs.
March 31, 2010 - 9:24pmThis Comment
rlyons, apparently you are as uneducated about female circumcision as you are about male circumcision.
Female circumcision for the most part also just removes a piece of skin that is on the outside. Only about 10% of female circumcisions are the type that is most often spoken about here. Apparently, female circumcision doesn't "deform(s) and ruin(s) a woman's body and disallows her to have any enjoyable sex in her whole life." The vast majority of women who are circumcised are perfectly happy with it. So happy in fact that they circumcise their daughters so they can also have the "perfected genitals." Here are a couple of articles you might want to read that will explain this:
http://www.fgmnetwork.org/authors/Lightfoot-klein/sexualexperience.htm
http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.html
Certainly this is not male dominance of females by males! However, it is typically a female that signs the consent form for males to be circumcised, not a male. This seems to be just the opposite of what you have posted!
Frank O'Hara
March 31, 2010 - 4:26pmThis Comment
"One though is that men have so much obsession with sex anyhow...do they REALLY need more sensitivity!?"
Interestingly this "obsession with sex" is a circumcised phenomena. Consensus is this is due to not having complete sexual satisfaction but the incomplete gratification of the act due to lost sensations. So, I believe it IS necessary.
March 31, 2010 - 7:58amThis Comment
A damaged part is a "perfect part"? This does not logically compute at all.
But then again, I, along with African men, prefer those perfectly circumcised female parts, I guess the cultural indoctrination trumps simple logic.
March 31, 2010 - 7:50amThis Comment
I am a European woman who had lived in the U.S. for the better part of her adult life and I have to say that aesthetically I prefer the circumcised member! I was only with one or two men who were not circumcised and I was a little afraid of it..LOL
March 30, 2010 - 7:08pmThat said, obviously it is more natural to leave it be, but for me, I am happy with my circumcised man. He has a perfect part and I am far more willing to partake of it; all "clean" and smooth with no extras...but each to his (or her) own. LOL!
One though is that men have so much obsession with sex anyhow...do they REALLY need more sensitivity!?
This Comment
I'll reverse your question: Would you willingly give up any of your sexual sensitivity? Would you give up any of your sex life? Of course, you know few men willingly give these things up. They are taken from them before they can defend themselves. What if you had lost sexually sensitive parts before you could stop it? Would you be perfectly happy about that or would you wonder what you had lost?
My father once bought a car "with no extras." It was a "Plain Jane" without air conditioning (here in the south!) and no radio. It also didn't have power steering or brakes and I can remember my mother struggling with it. Is that what we really want for our bodies and much less for our genitals?
Frank O'Hara
March 31, 2010 - 4:06pmThis Comment
I am merely pointing out that opinions that are based on evidence that is contradicted by facts and evidence are in essence -worthless, whether they come from men or women.
Interesting when your opinions are shown to be contradicted by those facts and evidence, one is accused of spouting venom. Since when is refuted opinion deemed to be the only acceptable when opined by women--especially when they are not the ones having their genitals damaged.
When YOU have had your genitals damaged, then please come back and give us your much-more valuable OPINION, and those opinuions then might have merit. But, ones who HAVE had theirs damaged are not entitled or have important opinions?
March 30, 2010 - 3:59pmThis Comment