The Sexual Preference for a Circumcised
Penis and its Disadvantages
by Mary G. Ray ©1997, All Rights Reserved
Last Modification:  10/31/99

       Little girls in Africa share a common bond with American boys. During female circumcision, their genitals are also cut. Their natural genitals are seen as ugly and unclean. They are considered unfit for marriage --unless-- they are circumcised.

       There are American women who similarly insist that the natural male is unclean and unappealing. They say they prefer a circumcised male. These women are not unlike African men who demand that their wives be circumcised. This common bond between African men and American women demonstrates an ignorant intolerance for natural genitals. Both cultures are unmindful that circumcision hurts them as well. Cutting the genitals of either gender modifies the sexual experience of the person cut as well as their sexual partners. Meanwhile, in other cultures, Europe for example, where the circumcised penis is the exception, women say they prefer a natural penis. It is natural to assume the idea that we prefer what is familiar to us.

       The foreskin is errogenous tissue that can enhance penile sensations during sex. This flesh “is like the hood of the female clitoris in function and anatomy. Both are comparable to the sensitive tissue of eyelids, inner lining of the tips and palms of the hands.” [Home]  

       Unlike the penis intact, the circumcised penis is not protected by a sheath. “The constantly exposed glans grows layers of nerveless cells (cornification) in an attempt to protect itself and [over time] the head becomes an abnormal, unnatural, desensitized and toughened organ.” Men circumcised later in life have complained that the removal of their foreskin dramatically reduced their sensual experience.

       Many circumcisions result in too much skin having been removed. It is especially difficult to realize how the amount removed as an infant will ultimately affect an adult male. One of the most common complaints of circumcised adults is that they experience painful erections because their circumcisions were drastic.

       The head of the circumcised penis requires heavy touching in order to be stimulated. Many experts believe that circumcision diminishes sensitivity during intercourse. A recent study found that circumcised men are sexually more adventurous than men intact. One theory is that circumcised men have an increased need for more intense stimulation such as masturbation, oral and anal sex. [Perlman]

       How can a foreskin benefit his sexual partner? One of the primary functions in the design of the penis is to preclude dry and painful intercourse. The foreskin “descreases abrasion and loss of fluid to the female.” This benefits usually goes unnoticed until later years when the female lubricates less. Read personal accounts of men who have experienced sex cut and uncut as well as of women who have experienced both in Which Sex is Better -- Cut or Uncut? 

       For an excellent description of  foreskin anatomy and the sexual advantages of remaining intact, visit Male Sexuality - Foreskin Anatomy  (and be fully prepared to see graphic photos of the natural adult penis.)  Some people who insist an uncircumcised penis is ugly haven't even seen one.  The natural penis looks natural  - because it is. The preceding link will provide you with the opportunity to see the difference in appearance and learn the details as to why the foreskin can enhance the sexual experience for the male and his mate.

Pictures of noncircumcised penises.
Full body pictures of males who are noncircumcised.
For an extremely thorough look, see the 33 foreskin photos.
For additional photos showing differences, CLICK HERE

Sexual Mechanics of Intercourse and Anatomy of the Penis
Return to The Foreskin Has Value

Top of Page
Return to Mothers Against Circumcision Homepage


Home Remedies, Intact Network Newsletter, Oct. 1996, Vol. 2:3, p. 3.

Perlman, David, Study Finds Circumcised Men More Sexually Adventurous but procedure has no health benefits, San Francisco Chronicle Science Editor, based on a study conducted by the University of Chicago and reported in The Journal of the American Medical Association (1997;277:1052-1057)