Amexmaxx
Unloved abused dog
- Joined
- May 24, 2020
- Posts
- 7,699
- Reputation
- 11,100
Plz disprove it. I will care. I got all day to reveal your cope.
Deleted member 16101
Platinum
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2021
- Posts
- 1,093
- Reputation
- 1,370
I have pinhole phimosis and I've been autistically researching this topic for the past couple years. My cock is almost completely numb and it's impossible for me to cum during penetration and even fapping takes ages with lots of pressure. My gf loves the fact that I last forever but it sucks on my end. I'm also a 4th year medical student and 5 months away from getting my MD (currently on the interview trail for radiology). For now I'm still too scared to go through with it but the studies and anecdotes I've collected are actually more balanced than you might think. I've read just about EVERY study on this subject and collected more than 1000 screenshots of anecdotal data from reddit.
There are several studies reporting adverse effects but there are actually a good amount of men who report either minimal change or even improved sexual sensation/function after the procedure. For this subject the most high-powered studies are randomized controlled trials where men are asked to directly compare the before and after.
Examples would be:
#1. Adult Male Circumcision: Effects on Sexual Function and Sexual Satisfaction in Kisumu, Kenya:
Sexual function parameters and results at 24 months pre- vs. post-operative included inability to ejaculate (1.3% vs 1.2%, respectively), premature ejaculation (PE; 3.9% vs 4.6%), pain during intercourse (0.7% vs 1.2%), lack of pleasure during intercourse (1.8% vs 1.0%), difficulty achieving/maintaining erection (2.3% vs 1.4%), or any of these dysfunctions combined (6.2% vs 5.8%). No statistically significant differences were found in frequency of any of the parameters
#2. The effect of male circumcision on sexual satisfaction and function, results from a randomized trial of male circumcision in Rakai, Uganda:
In this study 2210 men were circumcised. Male "sexual satisfaction" was reported at 98.5% pre-op vs 98.4% at 24 months post-op. 97.1% of female partners reported either "no change" or "improved sexual satisfaction". In regards to "how satisfied are you with the outcome", 99.5% of men reported at 24 months post-op being "very satisfied". Sexual function, based on the ability to achieve and maintain an erection (99.7% vs 99.9%, respectively), difficulty with vaginal penetration (0.6% vs 0.1%), difficulty with ejaculation (0.3% vs 0.1%), and pain during or after intercourse (0.1% vs 0.4%), did not differ significantly between each group at the end of the 24-month evaluation.
I've read other studies that are NOT randomized controlled trials but these studies are generally less impressive.
For example: two systematic reviews in China
#1: Tian et al in 2013: meta-analyses of data from 10 studies.
6 studies had data on erectile dysfunction (6,826 circumcised and 6,052 uncircumcised men in total), 3 on ejaculatory latency time (ELT; 309 vs 332 men), 5 on PE (7,695 vs 6,326 men), 4 on sexual desire low or lacking (6,826 vs 6,052 men), 4 on orgasm difficulties (6,683 vs 5,727 men), and 6 on dyspareunia (8,288 vs 6,894). For each dysfunction, no statistical difference was found between circumcised and uncircumcised men.
#2: 2018 systematic review by Yang et al identified 12 studies containing data for 10,019 circumcised and 11,570 uncircumcised men Their meta-analysis of data on orgasm difficulty in 5 studies comprising in total 6,745 circumcised and 5,789 uncircumcised men found no statistically significant difference. In contrast, compared with uncircumcised men, meta-analyses found circumcised men had on average 64% less pain during intercourse (P = .007; 6 studies comprising a total of 6,736 circumcised and 4,201 uncircumcised men), 28% lower ELT (P < .00001; 2 studies, 626 and 652 men), and 58% lower erectile dysfunction (P < .006; 6 studies, 6,764 and 5,947 men). Other studies have found that coital injuries were less common in circumcised men.
The second study doesn't make much "logical" sense to me because it found that out of over 10,000 Chinese men studied, circumcised men were 58% LESS likely to experience erectile dysfunction and 28% LOWER time to ejaculation. The common consensus among all the anecdotal data I reviewed is that it is generally found to be a desensitizing procedure; the results of these studies were statistically significant nonetheless.
I also autistically saved over 1000 anecdotal screenshots from reddit to help me build up the courage to get the procedure. Here are some of them:
I literally spent more time in the past couple years researching this shit than I did on radiology research for my residency applications lmao. I'm at least lucky that my pinhole phimosis is so tight that there's no chance of accidental retraction and I can fuck painlessly. I am mainly active on r/phimosis and r/circumcision but if anyone has gone through the procedure I would love to chat and hear your thoughts, feel free to DM me.
There are several studies reporting adverse effects but there are actually a good amount of men who report either minimal change or even improved sexual sensation/function after the procedure. For this subject the most high-powered studies are randomized controlled trials where men are asked to directly compare the before and after.
Examples would be:
#1. Adult Male Circumcision: Effects on Sexual Function and Sexual Satisfaction in Kisumu, Kenya:
Sexual function parameters and results at 24 months pre- vs. post-operative included inability to ejaculate (1.3% vs 1.2%, respectively), premature ejaculation (PE; 3.9% vs 4.6%), pain during intercourse (0.7% vs 1.2%), lack of pleasure during intercourse (1.8% vs 1.0%), difficulty achieving/maintaining erection (2.3% vs 1.4%), or any of these dysfunctions combined (6.2% vs 5.8%). No statistically significant differences were found in frequency of any of the parameters
#2. The effect of male circumcision on sexual satisfaction and function, results from a randomized trial of male circumcision in Rakai, Uganda:
In this study 2210 men were circumcised. Male "sexual satisfaction" was reported at 98.5% pre-op vs 98.4% at 24 months post-op. 97.1% of female partners reported either "no change" or "improved sexual satisfaction". In regards to "how satisfied are you with the outcome", 99.5% of men reported at 24 months post-op being "very satisfied". Sexual function, based on the ability to achieve and maintain an erection (99.7% vs 99.9%, respectively), difficulty with vaginal penetration (0.6% vs 0.1%), difficulty with ejaculation (0.3% vs 0.1%), and pain during or after intercourse (0.1% vs 0.4%), did not differ significantly between each group at the end of the 24-month evaluation.
I've read other studies that are NOT randomized controlled trials but these studies are generally less impressive.
For example: two systematic reviews in China
#1: Tian et al in 2013: meta-analyses of data from 10 studies.
6 studies had data on erectile dysfunction (6,826 circumcised and 6,052 uncircumcised men in total), 3 on ejaculatory latency time (ELT; 309 vs 332 men), 5 on PE (7,695 vs 6,326 men), 4 on sexual desire low or lacking (6,826 vs 6,052 men), 4 on orgasm difficulties (6,683 vs 5,727 men), and 6 on dyspareunia (8,288 vs 6,894). For each dysfunction, no statistical difference was found between circumcised and uncircumcised men.
#2: 2018 systematic review by Yang et al identified 12 studies containing data for 10,019 circumcised and 11,570 uncircumcised men Their meta-analysis of data on orgasm difficulty in 5 studies comprising in total 6,745 circumcised and 5,789 uncircumcised men found no statistically significant difference. In contrast, compared with uncircumcised men, meta-analyses found circumcised men had on average 64% less pain during intercourse (P = .007; 6 studies comprising a total of 6,736 circumcised and 4,201 uncircumcised men), 28% lower ELT (P < .00001; 2 studies, 626 and 652 men), and 58% lower erectile dysfunction (P < .006; 6 studies, 6,764 and 5,947 men). Other studies have found that coital injuries were less common in circumcised men.
The second study doesn't make much "logical" sense to me because it found that out of over 10,000 Chinese men studied, circumcised men were 58% LESS likely to experience erectile dysfunction and 28% LOWER time to ejaculation. The common consensus among all the anecdotal data I reviewed is that it is generally found to be a desensitizing procedure; the results of these studies were statistically significant nonetheless.
I also autistically saved over 1000 anecdotal screenshots from reddit to help me build up the courage to get the procedure. Here are some of them:
I literally spent more time in the past couple years researching this shit than I did on radiology research for my residency applications lmao. I'm at least lucky that my pinhole phimosis is so tight that there's no chance of accidental retraction and I can fuck painlessly. I am mainly active on r/phimosis and r/circumcision but if anyone has gone through the procedure I would love to chat and hear your thoughts, feel free to DM me.
Attachments
Deleted member 16048
🐴👞
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2021
- Posts
- 127
- Reputation
- 224
- OP
- #53
Thank you for actually contributing to the thread. I've also autistically researched the subject for a while but not nearly as long, so your information further reassures me of what I've found.
While I wouldn't suggest circumcision to most people, for your condition you'd undoubtedly experience benefits from undergoing the procedure. If you're worried about lasting for a shorter period of time after getting circumcised you should check out this guide, haven't been able to try it myself
feelswah but it looks goodI'll get to it tomorrow. Also by psychological effects you mean permanent changes to the brain caused by circumcision in infancy, correct?
Deleted member 16101
Platinum
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2021
- Posts
- 1,093
- Reputation
- 1,370
I can confidently comment on this topic as I've observed over 10 neonatal circumcisions from a foot away on my ob-gyn rotation.Thank you for actually contributing to the thread. I've also autistically researched the subject for a while but not nearly as long, so your information further reassures me of what I've found.
While I wouldn't suggest circumcision to most people, for your condition you'd undoubtedly experience benefits from undergoing the procedure. If you're worried about lasting for a shorter period of time after getting circumcised you should check out this guide, haven't been able to try it myself
I'll get to it tomorrow. Also by psychological effects you mean permanent changes to the brain caused by circumcision in infancy, correct?
#1: At least in the East Coast hospital I was at they used a local anesthesia injection of lidocaine into the dorsal nerve. The babies generally did not cry much and some only cried during the injection. This idea that they "go into shock" that I've seen on reddit is completely ludicrous and is an example of Facebook boomer style pseudointellectualism [akin to anti-Vaxx conspiracies which are founded on the ideals of "I know secret knowledge that makes me special" and "I oppose mainstream ideas therefore I am better than the dumb sheep who are being finessed by the elite (who in fact rely on the 'sheep' for labor and economy......)] Consider that during the tuberculosis crisis in 18th century America, the "elites" like Benjamin Franklin did everything they could to limit the spread of infection because more productive wage-slaves generally = richer elites in capitalistic societies.
#2: I am 100% against infant circumcision because it violates everything that the medical profession was founded on (ideals of consent, beneficence, non-maleficence and autonomy)
#3: I worked with patients throughout my rotations who received excruciatingly painful childhood surgeries (neonatal heart surgery, congenital intestinal malformation correction) with torturous months of recovery. In general these patients seem well-adjusted as adults with no common discernible psychiatric issues. What I found in common among the inpatient psychiatry patients I saw were impoverished and chaotic childhoods with abuse and substance addiction pervasive in their environments.
Deleted member 16048
🐴👞
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2021
- Posts
- 127
- Reputation
- 224
- OP
- #55
The amount of time you've spent researching this subject is terrifying, but respect nonetheless. You've said most of what I was intending on telling the circumcuck regarding the psychological effects (i.e., nothing jfl
) but I'll still dive deeper into disproving any possible claims I've heard about the psychological effects tomorrow simply out of boredom knowing this cuck would deny it either way. As for point #2 I agree completely, it is genuinely fucked up that circumcision is the choice of the parents alone, but those who have been circumcised shouldn't seethe over it so profusely.
Baldingman1998
Emerald
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2019
- Posts
- 35,346
- Reputation
- 63,957
How plz tell me
Amexmaxx
Unloved abused dog
- Joined
- May 24, 2020
- Posts
- 7,699
- Reputation
- 11,100
No that would be neurological or physiological. I mean psychological as in the psychosis it induces. The way it alters the males worldwide and self image.
Cali Yuga
Luminary
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2018
- Posts
- 6,898
- Reputation
- 10,081
i wouldnt know because kikes didnt sacrifice my manhood to their volcano demonI see a lot of you circumcucks whining about how "muh sex isn't enjoyable because muh jews mutilated muh baby penis!!!" This is untrue and anything that you have heard about the foreskin being vital to enjoying sex is bs. Anyone claiming that they lost satisfaction after getting circumcised either has other penis problems (erectile dysfunction, only able to get off to weird ass shit thanks to their porn addiction) or it's a placebo (many people have gotten circumcised as an adult and haven't reported a difference in sexual satisfaction). Anyone claiming that they gained satisfaction after restoring foreskin is definitely from a placebo or they're bullshitting (Jfl the same people claiming that vital sensitive parts of the penis are ripped off due to circumcision are saying that their sensitivity came back just because they stretched their penis skin for a while. That's not how it works jfl
Many circumcucks claim that the foreskin contains over 20,000 highly erogenous nerve endings that causes the majority of the male's pleasure during sex, depriving up to 75% of their sexual pleasure. I would like to take a moment to ask any of you where this retarded claim comes from, because no one seems to know the actual source.
Circumcucks often refer to the Meissner's corpuscles, the fine touch sensory receptors. They compare the sensitivity of other body parts to demonstrate that the presence or absence of these fine touch receptors determine the level of sensitivity (for example, the back of your hand is far less sensitive to touch than the palm of your hand, due to a larger presence of these receptors in the front). This is autistic. A 2008 study by Indian researchers ranked eight hairless skin sites in terms of density of Meissner's corpuscles, and concluded that the foreskin is last on the list.
View attachment 1406669
A 2016 study by Queens University PhD candidate Jennifer Bossio confirms that the foreskin is more sensitive to fine touch, but also measured other types of sensitivity. She found that the foreskin, while more sensitive to heat and pain than the glans, was not more sensitive than areas on the penile shaft. She concluded that "circumcision does not appear to remove the most sensitive part of the penis." Bossio explained that heat and pain are likely more relevant for sexual sensation than light touch. "We measured heat detection and heat pain by attaching a thermode to the penis. Men would indicate either when they would feel a change in temperature or when it hurt. The nerve fibers in the penis that are activated by temperature and pain are more relevant in sexual functioning — or the feel of a sexy touch — than the light touch that past researchers had done. Even though [the foreskin] is more sensitive to light touch, I suspect that isn't implicated in sexual pleasure.”
TL;DR: Not only does the foreskin contain fewer fine touch receptors than other areas of the body, but those fine touch receptors are unlikely to factor into erotic stimulation and pleasure.
Back to the retarded 20,000 nerve endings claim, it originated from physician and anti-circumcision advocate Paul Fless in a 1997 article in Mothering magazine. He claimed that “careful anatomical investigations have shown that circumcision cuts off … more than 20,000 nerve endings.” He cited his source as a 1932 paper by physiologist Henry Bazett. Nowhere on this paper does Bazett mention the presence of 20,000 nerve endings in the foreskin. Bazett counted 212 nerve endings of all types in a single square centimeter. Only 2 of the 212 nerve endings were fine-touch receptors (i.e. Meissner’s corpuscles), and none were genital corpuscles, the ones that most experts attribute to erogenous sensation. Bazett had a sample size of 1 and no comparison to any other area of skin to provide a control. So we have no idea how representative the sample is – either across the entire body or among different individuals. Nerve ending density may vary from one part of the foreskin to another. But Bazett didn’t indicate the location on the foreskin for the sample that he used. And although nerve ending density may change with age, Bazett didn’t state the age of the donor. It’s likely that the sample came from a newborn – which would typically have the highest density – and which cannot indicate the nerve density in an adult.
TL;DR the 20,000 nerve endings claim is completely unsupported by evidence.
Last but not least for "muh less sensitivity!!!" claim is the ridged band. The ridged band refers to the very tip of the foreskin. Researcher John Taylor claimed to have found more nerves in the ridged band (sometimes referred to as “Taylor’s band”) than in the rest of the foreskin. However other researchers have not verified this observation. Taylor was firmly against circumcision, and he failed to provide any numbers or raw data or sufficiently define the term “ridged band.” So it’s difficult to know whether his claim is true, how much of a difference there is, and whether it has any significant effect on sexual pleasure.
I would go over the claims regarding how infant circumcision causes permanent changes to the brain (which is bullshit), but I don't want to make this post too long or you autists will be too intimidated by the long text and refuse to read it. There are also a host of other retarded claims that I can disprove if anyone wants to bring them up. NO, I am not pro-circumcision, I will not circumcise my children, but it is really not nearly as bad as some circumcucks say it is. The only things I have against circumcision are the fact that the child should be allowed to choose if they want to become circumcised for themself when they are older (and they almost certainly will not choose to be circumcised), and the fact that the jews want me to do it therefore I will do the opposite.
Just for the lolz: in 2002 Donald R Taves, a psychiatrist at the University of Washington, conducted an experiment to measure the effect of foreskin on the force necessary for vaginal penetration. Taves cut a quarter-size hole in the bottom of a Styrofoam cup to simulate a vaginal opening. He mounted the cup on a diet scale to measure the force needed for a man to enter his partner's vagina. The 76 year-old Taves penetrated the hole with his erect penis - six times with his glans exposed, and six more times with his foreskin covering the glans. Taves described penetration with his foreskin covering the glans as "comfortable", while penetration with his foreskin pulled back and his glans exposed was "uncomfortable". He concluded that circumcised men use ten times greater force to enter a female partner than their uncircumcised peers. JUST FUCKING LOL @ THESE PEOPLE.
TL;DR: KYS I tried to make the post as engaging as possible for you autists and your chicken fried dopamine receptors. But in conclusion, circumcision is not harming your sex life, it has not caused you brain damage (your brain damage came from somewhere else), and also there's the fact that circumcised penises are generally considered more aesthetically pleasing in the U.S. + less chance of infection (generally seen as cope, but it's still true).
stay coping cutcels
D
Deleted member 9003
Emerald
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2020
- Posts
- 35,309
- Reputation
- 138,323
Foreskin restoration subliminals
Baldingman1998
Emerald
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2019
- Posts
- 35,346
- Reputation
- 63,957
Tell me how
Deleted member 16101
Platinum
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2021
- Posts
- 1,093
- Reputation
- 1,370
bumppp
Deleted member 16101
Platinum
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2021
- Posts
- 1,093
- Reputation
- 1,370
D
Deleted member 21146
Mistral
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2022
- Posts
- 2,127
- Reputation
- 1,845
Are you circumcised yourself you punk
lungisani
Silver
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2021
- Posts
- 601
- Reputation
- 462
Could I care less. Probably not.
Catawampus
Rubs me
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2019
- Posts
- 5,793
- Reputation
- 9,754
Wtf man?
D
Deleted member 21146
Mistral
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2022
- Posts
- 2,127
- Reputation
- 1,845
Shut up
Catawampus
Rubs me
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2019
- Posts
- 5,793
- Reputation
- 9,754
Bro what happened
D
Deleted member 21146
Mistral
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2022
- Posts
- 2,127
- Reputation
- 1,845
Amexmaxx
Unloved abused dog
- Joined
- May 24, 2020
- Posts
- 7,699
- Reputation
- 11,100
Imagine being this stupid. It doesn’t come from regrowing the skin to cover the glans. It comes from the dekeratinization (a concept im sure your smooth brain ass is unfamiliar with) and from the gliding action.
I wont even bother reading the rest of this bait.
Circumcision is the equivalent of cutting off your lips. You mean to tell me that if you cut off your lips your mouth wont dry out, teeth get brittle. Youll have trouble speaking and eating?
Basic logic defeats you clowns.
Amexmaxx
Unloved abused dog
- Joined
- May 24, 2020
- Posts
- 7,699
- Reputation
- 11,100
Imagine being this stupid. It doesn’t come from regrowing the skin to cover the glans. It comes from the dekeratinization (a concept im sure your smooth brain ass is unfamiliar with) and from the gliding action.
I wont even bother reading the rest of this bait.
Circumcision is the equivalent of cutting off your lips. You mean to tell me that if you cut off your lips your mouth wont dry out, teeth get brittle. Youll have trouble speaking and eating?
Basic logic defeats you clowns.
Similar threads
vratisevojvodo
