Less Sensitive=Lasts Longer - Mothering Forums
1 2  3 
The Case Against Circumcision > Less Sensitive=Lasts Longer
pdx.mothernurture's Avatar pdx.mothernurture 09:26 PM 03-20-2007
I am so sick of this justification. "Well, my husband feels plenty and if he was anymore sensitive sex would be over in minutes." or, "<Giggle> Well, for women, a man being a little less sensitive isn't necessarily a bad thing."

I'm so fed up.

I wonder what we would think if a man asserted he preferred women have a surgery that delayed or made orgasm more difficult because sexually frustrated women are insatiable?

"Oh, it's not so bad...she wants it all the time and can go and go and go."

We'd be appalled that anyone would suggest performing amputative surgery to decrease one person's sexual sensitivity, pleasure, and function to benefit a sexual partner, wouldn't we?

<grumble>

Jen

mntnmom's Avatar mntnmom 10:09 PM 03-20-2007
Well, I've been with both, it's not necessarily true.
I agree with you that it's horrifying justification. The idea that lack of sensitivity is a BENEFIT to the other partner, is cruel and insensitive!!
Besides, any woman who thinks a man has to rely on "lasting" a long time to pleasure a woman is regretably ignorant. If it we're that they were themselves perpetuating circ', I would pity their narrow experience!
BigC's Avatar BigC 10:38 PM 03-20-2007
That argument never ceases to astound me. What those people fail to understand is that intact men have better control because they can feel where their penis is.
Bm31's Avatar Bm31 10:44 PM 03-20-2007
Some of the pro-circ's admit it DOES make it less sensitive??? Then why will the rest of them claim that keratinization of the glans is a hoax?? :
jee'smom's Avatar jee'smom 10:49 PM 03-20-2007
Also, in "Sex as Nature Intended It", they explain that in the circumcised penis, the tightness of the skin puts pressure on the 'internal erectile tissue' (similar in structure to the clitoris, which extends much further inward than people realize), causing the release of chemicals, which triggers (sometimes premature) ejaculation. So, in other words, circumcised men think that it's their sensitivity that makes them ejaculate faster (hence the statement "Man, I wouldn't want to be anymore sensitive then I already am!!!"), but that's actually not true, and does not have much to do with their sensitivity. With intact men, they are more exquisitely sensitive, but can "hold it" longer (b/c there's not too much pressure on the internal erectile tissue, releasing chemicals that makes them ejaculate sooner then they should.)
My dh has said this to me as to why he's glad he's circumcised... "Man, hon, I find you so sexy and I'm so sensitive down there, I couldn't imagine being more sensitive then I already am." He doesn't get it.
pdx.mothernurture's Avatar pdx.mothernurture 10:51 PM 03-20-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bm31 View Post
Some of the pro-circ's admit it DOES make it less sensitive??? Then why will the rest of them claim that keratinization of the glans is a hoax?? :
I think the rationalization usually goes:

It doesn't decrease sensitivity.

If it did decrease sensitivity, they wouldn't have anything to compare it to/know the difference. Ignorance is bliss...who cares?

So what if it does decrease sensitivity, that's not necessarily a bad thing. My husband said he'd explode in 90 seconds if he was any more sensitive.

Gah.

Jen
jee'smom's Avatar jee'smom 10:54 PM 03-20-2007
That's exactly what I was talking about in my post (we posted at the same time).
mamakay's Avatar mamakay 10:55 PM 03-20-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdx.mothernurture View Post
I think the rationalization usually goes:

It doesn't decrease sensitivity.

If it did decrease sensitivity, they wouldn't have anything to compare it to/know the difference. Ignorance is bliss...who cares?

So what if it does decrease sensitivity, that's not necessarily a bad thing. My husband said he'd explode in 90 seconds if he was any more sensitive.

Gah.

Jen
Yep.

With a lil' "...and it's more attractive, anyway."

Bleh...
Bm31's Avatar Bm31 11:00 PM 03-20-2007
I've heard that from other guys before, Jen, but the truth is they wouldn't really know. I point blank asked one that question once, and he was stumped for a response. Really, I think it's all relative; by the time a guy is sexually active he will acclimate to it. And I think there's a difference between sensation and sensitivity too.
phatchristy's Avatar phatchristy 11:01 PM 03-20-2007
This was from a post a long time ago . I pulled it out from some of my saved material. I think this is a good analogy!

____

Sports Car Analogy- this is the best analogy I can think of - the
car thing is in no way an attempt to talk down to guys- it's
honestly the best one I can come up with. If I told your DH that I
had a great handling sports car, one that handles even better than
the one he has right now... a more sensitive car... Would he
say, "No way- that's impossible- if a car was any more sensitive
than mine- you could not drive it! You could not keep it on the
road!" No I doubt it. He would probably want me to explain how the
car was more sensitive- and I could tell him that the car has
stiffer shocks and race tires and a big engine which accelerates
fast- but fantastic state of the art breaks that can bring it to a
standstill effortlessly... he would not assume that this more
sensitive car was all acceleration and no breaks would he? He would
not assume it was all torque and no steering? So why would he assume
that the only sensitivity lost in cirucmcision is the sensitivity
that leads a man down to the road of no return? Could he ever
imagine that maybe the sensitivity lost in circumcision was the very
sensitivity that would allow him to enjoy making love without
fearing that he would explode? That maybe it's a type of sensitivity
that gives a man the feedback he needs- and the breaks from vaginal
wall friction to AVOID exploding when he does not want to?

___

And, it is EXACTLY the opposite of what the pro-circers think. Premature egaculation is much more prevalent among the circumcised. They lack the sensitivity and have less control and are less aware of how close they are to orgasm so they can't alter things to stop in time. So sad.
jee'smom's Avatar jee'smom 11:04 PM 03-20-2007
Wow, phatchristy, great reply!
phatchristy's Avatar phatchristy 11:05 PM 03-20-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdx.mothernurture View Post
I think the rationalization usually goes:

It doesn't decrease sensitivity.

If it did decrease sensitivity, they wouldn't have anything to compare it to/know the difference. Ignorance is bliss...who cares?

So what if it does decrease sensitivity, that's not necessarily a bad thing. My husband said he'd explode in 90 seconds if he was any more sensitive.

Gah.

Jen
All I am going to say is with a DH who is restoring, according to him there are actual NEW SENSATIONS that just didn't exist before in his tightly circ'd state. Just whole new things...a difference and experience. Sort of like broadening the horizons.

Think of it too as an artist who has only black and white to paint with. Then, just imagine getting a new color, then adding a new color...there is just more there.

Don't know how to put it any other way.
blsilva's Avatar blsilva 11:26 PM 03-20-2007
Oooh, I wish I had known about the Sports Car analogy 6 years ago! My dh tried to pull that one on me, and I had no answer for it. All I could do was fall back on the old major pain/not worth it strategy- which worked, btw, but I would have liked to have this argument under my belt too!
laprettygurl's Avatar laprettygurl 12:29 AM 03-21-2007
I've been with both and I'd rather have 5 minutes with an intact guy than hours with a circ'd guy.
baybee's Avatar baybee 04:05 AM 03-21-2007
In one circumcising cultural group, there's a saying that there are 3 good reasons to circumcise. They are: 1. We last longer 2. We last longer 3. We last longer. Seems to me that's a sad sales job to keep the practise going for future generations. In that same culture, there's a 14th Century scholar who warns against allowing the women of this group to experience sex with an intact man because she will be lost to the tribe if she does. Very mixed messages.

Circumcision is a good way to make an individual schizophrenic and I think it's also a way to make a culture whacko.
Daisyuk's Avatar Daisyuk 07:45 AM 03-21-2007
Well, to me, lasting longer = getting sore, bored, and pain that lasts for days. Not fun.

I'm sure it's a "male myth" about lasting longer being better, what woman wants them to go on and on and on and on, just pounding away? Being with a man who lasts forever results in me not wanting it at all, who wants to equate sex with pain? (Ok, I know some people do, but that's a different situation.)
jee'smom's Avatar jee'smom 12:11 PM 03-21-2007
I think b/c so many cirumcised men prematurely ejaculate, that the myth of "lasting longer = better" came about. Had these men stayed intact, they could've had more sensitivity AND lasted longer! (which circumcised men cannot even fathom!!!)
purposefulmother's Avatar purposefulmother 12:22 PM 03-21-2007
Circumcision is a good way to make an individual schizophrenic and I think it's also a way to make a culture whacko


Right on with that!
Romana's Avatar Romana 01:01 PM 03-21-2007
My husband can last forever, and it's one of his reasons for why he wants to circ any future sons (won't happen). HE is the one who uses this reason, not me, and it's hard to refute (I just say it doesn't make sense to deny a son sexual pleasure and that I don't think him lasting a long time has anything to do with being circ'd, but more something physiologically different about him and his dad (since his dad is the same; trust me, I didn't ask & have no personal knowledge)).

And FTR, it's not that he has a harder time climaxing or can't climax . . . he can just very easily choose when he wants it to happen, so he can always last as long or short as we want. Which is really nice. I didn't have that experience at all with the one other sexual partner I had prior to dh. That guy came in 5 seconds; it was terribly boring. Oh, and he was circ'd too.

Sigh. It's really frustrating when you can talk in circles and never get anywhere. Dh does not say keritanization of the glans is a myth; he says it's a good thing. Yeah, we don't talk about circ anymore.

Julia
dd 1 year old
phatchristy's Avatar phatchristy 02:11 PM 03-21-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Romana9+2 View Post

Sigh. It's really frustrating when you can talk in circles and never get anywhere. Dh does not say keritanization of the glans is a myth; he says it's a good thing. Yeah, we don't talk about circ anymore.

Julia
dd 1 year old

You know, there is no "cookie cutter" circ...no two are alike. Any adult who was circ'd as an infant was done to the personal taste of their circumciser. So, you can have one circ'd man who is very tightly circ'd, with very little inner foreskin left (scar is nearly next to the glans), and the frenulum scraped out. Then, you can have another who has a looser circ with most of the frenulum left.

It's something that should be left to your son's to choose. Honestly, if they reach 18 and they want to have it done (which is VERY unlikely btw...I've read fewer than 1 in a 1000 choose to have it done as adults even in this country--USA...in other intact nations it's like 1 in 17,000) they can have it done and they can minimize the most sensitive tissues that they lost. They can find a doctor who will leave the frenulum and innerforeskin there as much as possible.

Your dh's logic fails me for that reason. Maybe he doesn't understand that some men who are circ'd are VERY bad off. Maybe he just got a "better cut" than a lot of circ'd babies. Why RISK it even that his son winds up even worse off than daddy?

Anyhow, just a thought.
pdx.mothernurture's Avatar pdx.mothernurture 02:29 PM 03-21-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by phatchristy View Post
You know, there is no "cookie cutter" circ...no two are alike.
Indeed.

Penises are just like snowflakes.

Jen
AllieFaye's Avatar AllieFaye 11:16 AM 03-22-2007
As a women who has had both intact and circ'ed partners, I am so very sad over this argument.: It presumes that women need partners who can last a long time. They forget that sex for the woman is less satisfying with a circ'ed partner as well. The foreskin provides stimulation for the g-spot for women - that almost mythically hard to find spot in American culture. The foreskin does all the work, and generally women don't need as much stimulation to orgasm (on average, again - every penis is unique. : ) The whole "it's takes a lot of work and a long to get a woman to orgasm" is so very, very sad.
When I lived outside of the US, I noticed that they don't sell ribbed "for her pleasure" condoms. Don't need to.

Dh is the only circ'ed man to make it easy for me. Every intact man had no problem. Let's just say that statistically those odds are abysmal.
Monkeygrrl's Avatar Monkeygrrl 11:51 AM 03-22-2007
my partner actually has nerve damage from his circ...there are times when he wants to climax, it feels good, etc, but cannot because his penis will not cooperate...and he feels this is a direct result of the circ, because there is no other medical explanation for it (and we have been to the docs)...

and personally, just because it can go on for a while, doesnt make it pleasurable...just as men like it a certain way, so do women...and i am not a fan of being sore the next day because sex took a while...

peace...
InDaPhunk's Avatar InDaPhunk 10:48 PM 03-22-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdx.mothernurture View Post
I am so sick of this justification. "Well, my husband feels plenty and if he was anymore sensitive sex would be over in minutes." or, " Well, for women, a man being a little less sensitive isn't necessarily a bad thing."
There was a time I might have said this. He!!, I probably did say this.

I was not always the intactavist that I am today. I was as shallow and uninformed as they come.

But I changed. And changed quickly once I did about 10 mins of research.

The annoying thing is when people don't change- with or without research .
Monkeygrrl's Avatar Monkeygrrl 12:25 AM 03-23-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by InDaPhunk View Post
The annoying thing is when people don't change- with or without research .
exactly!!!!

it depresses me to see it on another board i am on... : i just cant click those message links anymore... *sigh*

peace...
ilovetiger's Avatar ilovetiger 03:06 AM 03-24-2007
here is an example of how an "anti circ" attitude gets out of control.. Instead of sticking to the real authentic, justifiable reasons that support in-tactness, these other ridiculous issues to strengthen their support surface. Premature ejaculation is 90% psychological and mental. Despite research that suggests any phsyical explanations to the contrary, it's miniscule compared to the overall psychological and mental influences that dictate climactic results. C'mon... The "findings" that are being mentioned here would be like a man saying: "in my sexual experiences, the women who had the best figure and kept herself in shape and exercised regularly and took a multi-vitamin every day had better sexual feelings than any of the overweight women I've been with." Any overweight women out here would have difficulty believing this, if SHE HERSELF thought that her sexual feelings were as good as they could possibly be. If a circ'ed guy believes that sex feels amazing, and couldn't imagine it being better, then who cares about what he might be missing?? If he's missing anything, then so perhaps is a women who takes for granted that being 20-30 pounds overweight isn't "missing out" on something that she doesn't have.

The point here is it's probably not as important what is present PHYSICALLY, but what is going on within the individual MENTALLY, and PSYCHOLOGICALLY. This is where being satisfied or dissatisfied lies, for BOTH men and women.
Quirky's Avatar Quirky 04:11 AM 03-24-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovetiger View Post
here is an example of how an "anti circ" attitude gets out of control.. Instead of sticking to the real authentic, justifiable reasons that support in-tactness, these other ridiculous issues to strengthen their support surface. Premature ejaculation is 90% psychological and mental. Despite research that suggests any phsyical explanations to the contrary, it's miniscule compared to the overall psychological and mental influences that dictate climactic results.
OK, show me the research that says that circed and intact men have equal rates of premature ejaculation. I agree that part of PE is going to be psychological/mental.....but why do you dismiss so easily the idea that surgically altering the genitals to completely change the mechanics and remove the most sensitive areas might affect a man's performance? There's plausible evidence to suggest that the ridged band, which is always removed with circ, is the primary ejaculation trigger in an intact man.

It's plausible that circumcision will make some men last longer, because they no longer have the sensitivity of the foreskin....and it's also plausible that it will contribute to PE in some men, because they're missing the fully functioning system that triggers ejaculation and don't have the control/fine-tuned sensitivity that an intact man does.
jee'smom's Avatar jee'smom 11:12 AM 03-24-2007
i love tiger~ You're very wrong. It's PROVEN that if a circ is too tight, the blood-filled caverns press on the inner erectile tissue too much, causing the release of chemicals that trigger ejaculation (which may or may not be premature, depending on the woman's preference, I guess!). You missed the whole point of the thread. We are talking about people who are pro-circ for the intention of "making a man last longer" and we are saying that being circumcised DOES NOT GUARANTEE that you will be able to last longer! and lasting longer is not always great with a circumcised man whose glans penis is ripping you apart and pulling all of the moisture out of you, instead of an intact man whose foreskin prevents this type of mechanical irritation. Also, one last point, just b/c you are more sensitive with a foreskin, doesn't mean that you will ejaculate faster. That's the point that circ'ed men just don't get! (but if you read through all of the posts again, instead of becoming defensive, b/c YOU obviously are circ'ed or are pro-circ., you would learn why this is, physiologically!!!) BTW, NOONE is saying that ejaculation isn't mostly psychological, we're saying that "circumcising a newborn baby, just so he will 'last longer later in life' is ridiculous, as there's NO GUARANTEE of this!" (Well, it's ridiculous on many other levels, this is just one example!) Good luck becoming educated on the subject, without being too defensive- I sincerely mean that; it must be hard to accept.
phatchristy's Avatar phatchristy 11:50 AM 03-24-2007
I've talked to several men who were intact, circ'd as adults (who later restored) and all three of them said they had better egaculatory control when they were intact. That includes both the circ'd and restored states. Of course, that in anticdotal...but research also shows that premature egaculation is actually *higher* rate wise with circumcised men.

The way the former intact men have described it to me is that they seem to have a winder range of levels of excitement which is really easy to alter. After being circumcised their sensation is decreased and they don't have so many levels to discern where they are in terms of being ready to egaculate.

Hope I'm explaining it so it makes sense.

Of course, there are also those men out there who have so much damage that they can go on forever. But, these also tend to be the guys who have to pound away with a lot of force to even egaculate.

(wow, I am so tired, please excuse me if I have serious spelling errors...DS has a tummy bug and I've been up for a while--he woke me up by throwing up on me ewww.....)
ilovetiger's Avatar ilovetiger 12:59 PM 03-24-2007
Some of you are REALLY stretching for anti-circ arguments. Gimme a break. The research is flawed, and the experimental sample shows nothing representative of ANYTHING of importance when attempting to derive at a plausible conclusion about circ vs intact and HOW LONG ONE WILL LAST, even with the undeniable changes in sensitivity. As soon as you admit that there are many exceptions, then it's an unworth argument..."they all wore the same underwear...".

I'm gonna start a thread entitled, "Physical characteristics that influence pain tolerance", as if to say that pain tolerance is determined by something pyhsically distinctive in an individual.. Regardless of what you FORCE YOURSELF to find with regard to a physical explanation, it's mental and psychologically controlled. It's all about training and experience.

I ADMIT there are physical differences, and they are, perhaps, factors, BUT they are unnoticable due to the tremendous amount mental and psychological factors that go into the sexual experience.

I have a few analogies of my own, which I'd be happy to share, but I think I've already made my point.
1 2  3 

Up