19/02/2024
Did You Know That Male Circumcision May Cause long -Term Discomfort For Women!?
By
Chiedu J. Nchekwube, MD, FAAFP, ABIHM
It may be surprising to a lot of people to learn that a short-termed painful male circumcision may be a source of long-termed discomfort for women.
How can this be?
It turns out that, for both the man and the woman, there is a purpose for the fo****in that is unnecessarily surgically removed in the process of circumcision.
What is circumcision?
Circumcision is when the fo****in is surgically removed in a minor operation on a normal or abnormally formed fo****in of the p***s. Usually, surgical operations are performed on abnormal organs that need repair, to improve functions or relieve issues related to bodily dysfunctions. Some individuals, however, may request plastic surgery to change normally formed organs to reflect their preferences. This often is not the case with newborn males, who obviously cannot speak for themselves about circumcision!
According to surgical encyclopedia, “Necessary surgery refers to surgical procedures that pertain to a condition that cannot be treated by other methods and, if left untreated would threaten the life of the patient, fail to repair or improve a body function, increase the patient's pain, or prevent the diagnosis of a serious or painful condition. The emphasis here is that, according to medical judgment, surgery is “mandated.” However, in the case of circumcision of the newborn male, the tissue is usually healthy indeed. The process, in itself, seemingly innocuous, may be termed “mutilation” of healthy male ge***alia!
A report published in the British Journal of Urology (Taylor, J. et al., "The Prepuce: Specialized Mucosa of the P***s and Its Loss to Circumcision," BJU 77 (1996): 291–295) assessed the type and amount of tissue missing from the adult circumcised p***s by examining adult fo****ins obtained at autopsy; investigators found that circumcision removes about one-half of the erogenous tissue on the pe**le shaft. The fo****in, according to the study, protects the head of the p***s and is comprised of Unique Zones with several kinds of specialized nerves that are important for optimum sexual sensitivity. It also creams or produces a lubricant that facilitates intromission {pe*******on} and makes the sexual encounter more pleasurable.
Amnesty International, that has never said a word to discourage male circumcision, takes a strong stand against female ge***al mutilation (FGM). It defines the process as the removal of any part of the female ge***alia. By this definition, the removal of any part of normally formed male ge***alia must also be defined as a form of ge***al mutilation. Many tribal cultures that practice FGM also practice male circumcision, and they see the process as similar in nature, and the cl****is as the female equivalent of the male fo****in.
No matter how you view it, circumcision of either the male or female is a form of torture that needs to be banned by all cultures, now that we are aware that it is unnecessary for life. Not too long ago, an Ethiopian immigrant to the United States was jailed because he circumcised his minor female child. The man pleaded that he was following the dictates of his culture, but was jailed nonetheless.
Here in the United States, male circumcision is considered a therapeutic or at best, a prophylactic procedure. 85% of the world's males are intact, with few fo****in problems. America (60%) and some countries represent a few of the nations left in the world still circumcising most of their newborn males for non-religious reasons.
For example, every day in the United States, over 3,300 baby boys are circumcised, more than 1.25 million infants annually, at an annual cost to parents and health insurers exceeding $1.85 Billion.
If equal standards are applied to the United States as the rest of the world, she will stand condemned as much as the primitive tribes that perform circumcisions on female children. According to the United Nations, “…The circumcision of boys aged 9 to 13 years and female ge***al mutilation of girls aged between 7 and 12 years among the Fula and Mandinga ethnic groups are the most cruel and harmful practices. There are no effective measures at the national level to eliminate them.” (United Nations press release, 22 May 2002)
Infant male circumcision continues despite growing questions about its medical justification. As it is usually performed without analgesia or anesthesia, circumcision is observably painful. It is likely that ge***al cutting has physical, sexual, and psychological consequences, too. Some studies link involuntary newborn male circumcision with a range of negative emotions and even post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Some circumcised men have described their current feelings in the language of violation, torture, mutilation, and sexual assault.
A team of Canadian researchers produced new evidence that circumcision has long-lasting traumatic effects. An article published in the international medical journal, The Lancet reported the effect of infant circumcision on pain response during subsequent routine vaccination. The researchers tested 87 infants at 4 months or 6 months of age. The boys who had been circumcised were more sensitive to pain than the uncircumcised boys. The differences between the two groups were significant regarding facial action, crying time, and assessments of pain.
The authors believe that "neonatal circumcision may induce long-lasting changes in infant pain behavior because of alterations in the infant’s central neural processing of painful stimuli." They also wrote that "the long-term consequences of surgery done without anesthesia are likely to include post-traumatic stress, as well as pain. It is therefore possible that the greater vaccination response in the infants circumcised without anesthesia may represent an infant analogue of a post-traumatic stress disorder triggered by a traumatic and painful event and re-experienced under similar circumstances of pain during vaccination." (Taddio, A. et al., "Effect of Neonatal Circumcision on Pain Response during Subsequent Routine Vaccination" The Lancet 349 (1997): 599–603.)
The impact of male circumcision on vaginal dryness during coitus {sexual in*******se} was also investigated. A survey of 35 female sexual partners aged 18 to 69 years who had experienced sexual in*******se with both circumcised and ge***ally intact men was conducted. Surveyed women reported that they were significantly more likely to have experienced vaginal dryness during in*******se with circumcised than with ge***ally fo****in intact men!
Masters and Johnson observed that the male fo****in unrolled during in*******se. In a prior study, the observation was also made that intromission (i.e., pe*******on) was much easier during sexual in*******se with intact males. To evaluate this observation an artificial introitus was mounted on scales. Repeated measurements showed a 10-fold reduction of force on entry with an initially un-retracted fo****in as compared to entry with a retracted fo****in.
A survey of women who have had sexual experience with circumcised and anatomically complete partners showed that the anatomically complete p***s was preferred over the circumcised p***s.
Without the fo****in to provide a movable sleeve of skin, in*******se with a circumcised p***s resulted in female discomfort from increased friction, abrasion, and loss of natural secretions. Those who responded to the survey overwhelmingly agreed that sexual in*******se was different with the two groups of men.
Unaltered or uncircumcised men tended to thrust more gently with shorter intromission strokes. (O’Hara, K. and O’Hara, J., "The Effect of Male Circumcision on the Sexual Enjoyment of the Female Partner," BJU 83 (1999): suppl. 1: 79–84)
In view of the acute as well as long-term disservice of circumcision, isn’t it time health professionals and scientists re-examined the evidence against the merit of this arcane procedure? It is my belief, that if they don’t, the wisdom of public opinion should be brought to bear on this subject; for the sake of newborns and their future wives or partners.
