Here's an example of what we stasticians would call a "biased sample". Subjects were recruited via an anti-circumcision publication. Geez, I wonder what the survey results are going to say...
Who Is The Better Lover: Circumcised Or Intact Men?
January 20, 1999
From our sponsors:
Hereâ??s a brand new study on circumcision that got my attention right away. The subject is the effect of male circumcision on womenâ??s sexual enjoyment. This article comes to us from the BJU International,a British urological publication.
This is the first study to look at what women said in comparing sexual experiences with sexual partners who were circumcised versus intact sexual partners.
Researchers recruited women through magazine ads and an anti-circumcision publication and sent the women respondents 40 written survey questions.
The 139 women respondents were overwhelming in favor of sex with intact partners.
With circumcised partners, women were less likely to have a vaginal orgasm or multiple orgasms and were more likely to experience sexual discomfort, the report says. "During prolonged intercourse with their circumcised partners, women were less likely to â??really get into itâ?? and more likely to â??want to get it over with,â??" the authors, Drs. K. Oâ??Hara and J. Oâ??Hara, report.
The authors continue, "respondents overwhelmingly concurred that the mechanics of coitus were different for the two groups...73 percent [of the women] reported that circumcised men tended to thrust harder and deeper, using elongated strokes, while unaltered men thrust more gently, to have shorter thrusts and tended to be in contact with the mons pubis and the clitoris more."
Remember these are statistics and they are not true for every individual.
"While some of the respondents commented that they thought the differences were in the men, not the type of penis, the consistency with which women felt more intimate with their unaltered partners is striking," the authors state. "Why the presence of a foreskin enhances intimacy needs further exploration."
Many societies have seen genital mutilation as a way to try to control sexuality. Female genital mutilation in Africa is still used to decrease womenâ??s desire today, while in the 1800s society thought circumcision in men would curb menâ??s desire to masturbate.
Back in the 12th century, Moses Maimonides, a rabbi, said circumcision could control menâ??s desires for sex. He also said women were less likely to leave an intact man once they had had sex with him, which is consistent with what these 20th century researchers found.
The study's authors conclude that "the anatomically complete penis offers a more rewarding experience during coitus," and that, "...the negative effect of circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female needs to be part of any discussions providing â??informed consentâ?? before circumcision."
The point that I am trying to make is that circumcision is painful, unnecessary, and, now, we can see from this evidence, less likely to promote a good sex life and a long and happy marriage. Why donâ??t we stop this practice?
