Male circumcision tied to less sexual pleasure (Reuters Health)

[taco.vidal]

Men circumcised either as children or adults report less intense sexual pleasure and orgasm than their uncircumcised counterparts, according to a new study from Belgium.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/0...91D1CO20130214

[Jimmy Stang]

Hooray tor toques!

[pseudoreality]

You mean genital mutilation doesn't make it feel better?

[Cain]

Barbaric practice when done for non medical reasons. Ease of cleaning is not a medical reason either.

[blankall]

Let's take a look at their scientific method:

The new study surveyed 1,369 men over the age of 18, who responded to leaflets handed out in train stations across Belgium.

The men were asked whether they were circumcised, and were then asked to rate how sensitive their penis was, how intense their orgasms were and whether they experience any pain or numbness when they are aroused.

In Belgium, the only circumsized men will likely be muslim. So, their study consisted of asking men, who have no experience what the other option is like, to describe how intense their orgasms were. They found muslims describe their organisms as less intense than Christians.

[Cain]

So religion makes your orgasm different? Which is best? I'll convert right now.

[RedMileDJ]

Originally Posted by Cain

Barbaric practice when done for non medical reasons. Ease of cleaning is not a medical reason either.

There many other reasons than "ease of cleaning."

[Cain]

I was just getting that one specifically out the way. Seems to be popular.

[rubecube]

I think the only accurate way you could do a study like this would be to study dudes who've been circumcised as adults, and have experienced sex in both scenarios.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Red-Mile-DJ

There many other reasons than "ease of cleaning."

From the same article:

Tobian, from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, said the findings are missing important context.
"The medical evidence and the benefits of male circumcision are abundantly clear," Tobian told Reuters Health.
"If there was a vaccine out there that reduces the risk of HIV by 60 percent, herpes by 30 percent and the penile cancer causing HPV by 35 percent, the medical community would rally behind it," said Tobian.
The American Academy of Pediatrics says the benefits of male circumcision outweigh the risks, but stops short of recommending universal circumcision (see Reuters story of August 27, 2012 here.

[return to the red]

Touquers probably faking it

Can you imagine standing in a train station and getting a piece of paper handed to you

Check the one which most applies to you

1. German Soldier ____ Cuban Missile ___
2. Have Intense Orgasms ___ Meh It Does the Job ___

[RedMileDJ]

Originally Posted by blankall

From the same article:

Haven't read the article. Oops.

[Boblobla]

If it gives you more pleasure I am impressed you toquers aren't just blasting in your pants all over the place.

[Canada 02]

If there was a vaccine out there that reduces the risk of HIV by 60 percent, herpes by 30 percent and the penile cancer causing HPV by 35 percent, the medical community would rally behind it

The medical community should rally behind abstinence or monogamy to reduce the risk by 100 percent; they should also advocate double mastectomies for 100% reduced risk of breast cancer, universal castration to prevent testicular cancer, and other prophylactic organ removals, just in case

[Canada 02]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

If it gives you more pleasure I am impressed you toquers aren't just blasting in your pants all over the place.

who says we aren't

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

If there was a vaccine out there that reduces the risk of HIV by 60 percent, herpes by 30 percent and the penile cancer causing HPV by 35 percent, the medical community would rally behind it

The medical community should rally behind abstinence or monogamy to reduce the risk by 100 percent

Wow....that's lame.

[YYC in LAX]

lol, this isn't news at all. Pretty sure this has been well known for a long time.

I'm cut and don't give a #### about the reduced pleasure. I'm not even gonna argue that it's cleaner. All I know is i've got a beautiful, aesteticaly pleasing dick and the ladies love that.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

The medical community should rally behind abstinence or monogamy to reduce the risk by 100 percent

That is definitely a proven way to prevent people from having sex ever....

[blankall]

Originally Posted by YYC in LAX

lol, this isn't news at all. Pretty sure this has been well known for a long time.

I'm cut and don't give a #### about the reduced pleasure. I'm not even gonna argue that it's cleaner. All I know is i've got a beautiful, aesteticaly pleasing dick and the ladies love that.

1) It actually hasn't been proven. This study is bogus.

2) Even if it did reduce sensitivity, when was under-sensitivity ever this epic problem for men. Last time I checked they sell billions of dollars worth of product designed to reduce sensitivity and increase stamina.

[To Be Quite Honest]

If removing the most sensitive part of the woman's body is cruel then removing the most sensitive part on a mans body is cruel.